Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Gaston wrote:

About Pianoteq realism
With the new pianos each update brings more realism.
A contributor on a Reaper forum wrote this about my first track made with the new Bechstein DG :

"Not my kind of Music, so I can't comment on this, but your recording to me sounds more "real" than the ones at the Pianoteq website. In fact the most realistic Pianoteq example I heard yet. "

With this Bechstein I bet I won't be the only one to get such comments.

Not liking your music but liking Pianoteq... I’d say that is a great compliment for pianoteq ... and open minded too. Nice.

Last edited by Kramster1 (27-01-2019 14:26)
Pianoteq 8, most pianos, Studiologic 73 Piano, Casio Px-560M, PX-S 3000, PX-S 1100, PX-S 7000, Mac i27 and MacBook Pro M3, SS Logic SSL 2

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

As a proud Bechstein (upright) owner I knew I'd buy the new model without question. I've been auditioning all the pianos I don't have (Grotrian, Steinway B, Steingraeber, Petrof, U4) to find a contender for the second one at 50% off in the current offer.

I've not played any of them before. They're all nice and have their strengths and weaknesses to my liking, but the Steinway B... wow! I'm not a fan of Steinway as a company so only tried the B as an afterthought, but I'm so glad I did as it is a truly wonderful instrument.

I've matched the settings of the B on the Bechstein but it still sounds much more in the same league as the Steinway D rather than the B i.e. it sounds like a big concert grand. There's something about the B that sounds more compact – not in a bad way, better balanced – not overbearing like the D can be. I can imagine it fitting in better in a rock mix, though I've yet to try.

Consequently, I'd dearly love Modartt to model a smaller Bechstein comparable to the Steinway B, I guess that would be their B 212 or maybe the C 234.

PTQ Std: Blüthner, K2, YC5, Steinway D, Kremsegg 2, Celeste, Hohner, Electric pianos
UbuntuStudio, SL88 Grand, Keystation 88es

1903 Bechstein Model 8, Yamaha CP-30

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

I second that, more smaller grands in general would be great!

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Precisely, that's what I would like to see (along with an expansion of the historical collection): more studio-size pianos. We do have some vintage ones (Pleyel 1926, Erard 1922, and Bechstein 1899 in Kremsegg) and they are great, but it would be wonderful to have something like a modern studio-size Bechstein.

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Baldwin uprights?

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

I don’t  know that I can handle anymore pianos...I have them all and all are so nice. You know I will buy what ever the next one is... sure is fun though.... by the time I get through playing around with all the pianos through monitors and then headphones and single and double instances I need a nap...ha...

Pianoteq 8, most pianos, Studiologic 73 Piano, Casio Px-560M, PX-S 3000, PX-S 1100, PX-S 7000, Mac i27 and MacBook Pro M3, SS Logic SSL 2

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

I personally feel there are already enough different standard piano models released. I'd like to see Moddart make something different: An Una Corda piano like released by Native instruments (which is already interesting, but of course sampled) and a felt piano.
Not sure how difficult that would  be, but if it was made well, I'd buy it instantly.

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Kramster1 wrote:

I don’t  know that I can handle anymore pianos...I have them all and all are so nice. You know I will buy what ever the next one is... sure is fun though.... by the time I get through playing around with all the pianos through monitors and then headphones and single and double instances I need a nap...ha...

I think that there are plenty to choose from already. At some point, it can become a distraction. I would much rather see improvements in general sound quality of the existing models (like the much improved Steinways in 6.4) and user interface.

Last edited by aWc (26-02-2019 20:58)
PT 7.3 with Steinway B and D, U4 upright, YC5, Bechstein DG, Steingraeber, Ant. Petrov, Kremsegg Collection #2, Electric Pianos and Hohner Collection. http://antoinewcaron.com

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

a) a classic Bösendorfer (CS 200 or Imperial)
b) one the "new" Bösendorfer VCs
c) an August Förster grand
c) Glenn Gould's CD318 Steinway, from recordings, before it was broken

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

I wonder if Modartt would consent to briefly become Modarrt on Talk Like a Pirate Day?

Edit: to make sense of this post now, the original title referenced Modartt as Modarrt

Last edited by Platypus (18-04-2019 16:34)

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

alba63 wrote:

I personally feel there are already enough different standard piano models released. I'd like to see Moddart make something different: An Una Corda piano like released by Native instruments (which is already interesting, but of course sampled) and a felt piano.
Not sure how difficult that would  be, but if it was made well, I'd buy it instantly.

Seconded. I'd also love a piano that isn't derived from the same-y sounding grands of today, large or small. Either the Klavins 450 or the Una Corda series would breathe fresh air into the piano soundscape, as well as the recently-released Stuart & Sons Beleura, with 108(!) keys!

Last edited by lowendtheory (28-02-2019 05:22)

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

> Stuart & Sons Beleura

that is quite a beast.  the recordings online sound very interesting.  i wonder how difficult it is to adapt to the extended keyboard?  (unlike the Boesendorfer Imperial the extra keys aren't colored differently.)  i think i could get used to it ...

i've never had a chance to try any pianos by this builder.  never seen one in the US.

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Hi,

I’d like PTQ to finaly nail the close miced, bright grand piano sound that you hear on new jazz records for example. For years I have pointed out that PTQ works nicely on mellow, more distant and room sounding or classical pianos but this ”Chick Corea” sound has been its weakest point. When it can do that, then it’s a finally a winner. If you ask what model, I’d say Yamaha Grand but imo it’s more about recording technique which makes this special sound...

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Ecaroh wrote:

Hi,

I’d like PTQ to finaly nail the close miced, bright grand piano sound that you hear on new jazz records for example. For years I have pointed out that PTQ works nicely on mellow, more distant and room sounding or classical pianos but this ”Chick Corea” sound has been its weakest point. When it can do that, then it’s a finally a winner. If you ask what model, I’d say Yamaha Grand but imo it’s more about recording technique which makes this special sound...

Agreed. Keiko Matsui and some other jazz and new age pianists seem to favor bright pianos.

Kawai ES110, Pianoteq 7 Standard, Electric pianos, Steinway B and D, Bechstein, Bluethner, K2, U-Phoria UMC204HD, Sony MDR-7506

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

DaveL wrote:
Ecaroh wrote:

Hi,

I’d like PTQ to finaly nail the close miced, bright grand piano sound that you hear on new jazz records for example. For years I have pointed out that PTQ works nicely on mellow, more distant and room sounding or classical pianos but this ”Chick Corea” sound has been its weakest point. When it can do that, then it’s a finally a winner. If you ask what model, I’d say Yamaha Grand but imo it’s more about recording technique which makes this special sound...

Agreed. Keiko Matsui and some other jazz and new age pianists seem to favor bright pianos.

Then again, I would prefer the subdued, soft and rather dull sound of Ólafur Arnalds and Nils Frahm.

Pianoteq Pro Studio with Bösendorfer, Shigeru Kawai and Organteq

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

I would like Modart to do an upgrade of Piantoteq by adding an audio output configuration to a flat surface transducer. I believe that this setting can provide even more "realism" in the pianoteq. This is because there is no algorithm capable of making a speaker membrane sound like a harmonic board, even with a transducer, it may be possible.

Respeito, Esforço e Sabedoria

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Professor Leandro Duarte wrote:

I would like Modart to do an upgrade of Piantoteq by adding an audio output configuration to a flat surface transducer. I believe that this setting can provide even more "realism" in the pianoteq. This is because there is no algorithm capable of making a speaker membrane sound like a harmonic board, even with a transducer, it may be possible.

+1
(this and more 18th & 19th century instruments... )

Matthieu 7:6

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Vintage pianos such as Chickering grands and even some spinets such as Baldwin Acrosonic and Wurlitzers

Last edited by edhastie (04-03-2019 06:07)

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

I would like a more convincing upright piano

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

I'd like to see new improved versions of the pianos that they have already modeled. I think that the latest Bechstein is incredibly more realistic compared to the previous ones (the Steinway D, for example). It would be nice if they renewed the old models, improving the realism and quality of them, before moving to other pianos. (The same for the EPs).

How to play piano in 3 weeks. Be a pianist, wait 3 weeks, play.

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

I want the wood to be heard better. For all Grandpianos.
Then I wish me a Bosendorfer Grand and a nice old piano as it stands around grandmother

Pianoteq 7 Pro with all pianos

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Urs Zimmermann wrote:

I want the wood to be heard better.

+1

Pianoteq Pro Studio with Bösendorfer, Shigeru Kawai and Organteq

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

edhastie wrote:

Vintage pianos such as Chickering grands and even some spinets such as Baldwin Acrosonic and Wurlitzers

Alas, I worry that American pianos may not find their way to europe often. A shame, yes.

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Agree Jake, some US pianos would be cool if possible and perhaps a good PR thing for all.

I'm past the point though where I wonder if we need to ask Modartt to improve

If I can add any new thoughts to the topic, it would be that, I'd probably personally prefer (like others have brought up) something unusual, if not ancient! _DJ_'s historical studies warrant some examination for discovering interesting pianos for the 'library' aspect of it. Some pianos mentioned do already exist (or near enough also in Pianoteq - the letter K the letter Y - and they can be utterly convincing!) - but YMMV with equipment and time spent at it.


I have some of my own thoughts for these 4 comments just above - it made me sit down - apologies if it's a rant - it's just typing quickly some thoughts (been a while):


For those saying it's too bright, there will be others saying it's too dark.

Same for wood comments Others will say "we need more metal". The balance and truths are in there - and a lot will come down to your velocity curve! Seriously - Urs, even just a few days ago, I came to a better velo curve - this after years of always improving it - every year, this keyboard sounds better/more real using Piano - if we don't do this, it's not going to improve anywhere near as much as it can our experience. There's a curve page for keyboards if users are not aware of it.. maybe you can find a user supplied perfect curve - it may change your brains!


1
"Not bright"

A:
So many fixes - *velocity curve*, EQ etc, 30+ interacting params more in Pro


2
"not convincing"

A:
Posting below some links


3
"more wood"

A:
Velocity curve down & or Place a mic under the piano!


4
"should improve existing pianos"

A:
More rubber hits road working from scratch on new pianos - only then, those lessons can be applied to existing pianos... not the other way around Aha!


First thing to say is, that Pianoteq is the last software to deserve to be called such limited things or to inspire concern about stagnation

To sum the above, sometimes it's equipment (do you have an entry level laptop or a million bucks worth of studio? These experiences are different - but with Pianoteq it IS possible to get a close real piano experience, let alone a vastly malleable production tool which, IMO exceeds all other piano software on the market. YMMV - and sometimes that's only because of missing something fixable.. in which case it's maybe minutes or a day away from being solved - how good's that? It may take expenditure to upgrade from 2 inch PC-grade tweeter baubles to speakers/headphones which are more fit for purpose (like taking all the headroom in a piano signal and so on).

IF you're listening on low-grade or entry level equipment, AND you still think something out there sounds better than Pianoteq, then obvs, there's nothing to say other than, you will need to know, nobody will want to hear Piano or anything else on that kind of gear, unless in passing - but if working hard on making a great sound with gear you slaved for - that's where you find satisfaction.. and on good gear (and in studio etc.) it means Pianoteq is miles in front - and in many other ways too.


On the subject of having the right equipment for the best results:

Here's what others had to say. Applies. Applies.


I wish everyone gets their dream piano, I sincerely do.. (or we all do with a 'great Library wonder' of all the world's pianos! with Modartt tech) until this time.. here's something I think I overlooked for way too long - esp. inre comment #2 mentioned above about "convincing":


Here's a link to a MP3 of a song called "Man With A Musical Lighter" from the Pianoteq reference page by Steve Nieve.

Seriously - Listen to that, U4 recorded using Pianoteq version 4! not 5 or 6 - then look at who he's worked with (there are ~20 Grammy winners/nominees on that page alone - not that there are only Grammy folks there, but the long list of these exceptional artists and professionals, all worth checking out, are saying similar cool things about Pianoteq which gel 100% with my experiences.

Look at who all these people work(ed) with! Forgot about this page or failed to find it in the past - I love Steve's contributions - and there are others using Pianoteq there - note, these people have taken time to do that - allowing us to see some little gems.

All that is not meant to diminish the incredible and superb contributions on the Recordings featuring Pianoteq page. Stunning stuff abounds there all day long! and it's wonderful to get time to go in for a listen to what others are doing here - clearly displaying what's being done, not just what might be possible - and you can get many of these kinds of results by exporting from inside Pianoteq and maybe some learning on top, to find best reverb types or mic settings etc. and I personally know several good people there who sincerely HAVE spent time learning more of that side of things, so that their experience, and output is vastly improved - that's old fashioned though I suppose hehe ;p That's my "Dad vibe" - "Hey kids, cheer up, the old TV isn't colour but Wacko the clown is on after these pomade ads - get yer spam crispies and si'down and be happy".

Many of these people use Pianoteq to the full - and I expect, will keep using it as it improves - goes without saying IMO - then consider if it's "convincing" - then consider you may just need to work on something (like your speakers, or keyboard, or velocity curve, or EQ settings to suit your earphones etc.. none of this is avoidable even for professionals IF the goal is "good sound"). A little more pause before you say such things esp. to those who also don't know what's possible, please?

Otherwise it begins to look like some negative SEO campaign, and please don't be silly enough to get dragged in to support it.

I know and fear that this mayn't sound like humble criticism - but it's well intentioned I assure all of you! - it's natural to not be aware of how to make a nice recording before you have some experience and some tools apropos to the task - but you learn these things with time and efforts taken (osmosis is as good or way better than didactic rote learning IMO) - you don't just say "This hammer sucks" if you don't know how to swing it, right? You learn, you hit your thumb a few times, you ask for help, someone teaches you enough to get you past the "Aha!" phase, the rest is history, erm, sometime in the future.. That's all

Here's Steve Nieve's quote, in case time doesn't permit clicking through above (Apologies to post this here - but it's so pertinent - it's someone who's posted beautiful MP3s for us using version 4 and has such an exceptional career in music - and not only would I take his word before most forum posters here, I'd recommend you go further and read all the others like Steve who are not only amazing people, but are probably taking Pianoteq for what it is.. and happily:

Steve Nieve wrote:

I have always been impressed by the results I am able to achieve with Pianoteq. It sounds as natural or as unnatural as I want. Pianoteq's sound editing facilities make it extremely versatile for the modern pianist with an ear to fine audio tuning. I love the slider that sets the condition of the piano from pristine to totally destroyed. The designers have thought to everything, but have managed to maintain a simple interface which never gets in the way of musical creativity. All the add ons sound equally realistic and the other important dimension is the effects section, absolutely wonderful and simple to operate. Another important consideration, the superb responsiveness of this software, that sets it apart from all other virtual pianos. Every style of music that I'm interested in is instantly playable on Pianoteq. I love working, playing and creating music with this incredibly powerful, deceptively simple software

You notice, he didn't say "It's not convincing" - because he has learned how to use it - simple as that.

I can use cornflakes out of the box (b'dum tish!) but there's more to your best possible audio results than owning a laptop and sticking a keyboard in.

That page - full of Grammy Award winners and nominees and others at the apex of their musical careers - read their words. It FITS with my experience - not the comments of users who may need to change something in their own workflow - said with love! (I'm out there on the forum often trying my best to help people get the best out of it) and hope this helps inspire some users to take stock, maybe 'get real' to an extent and get moving to improve their own room/speakers/hardware/keyboard

Go at it..

Back on topic - I've previously posted my highly unlikely (but beautiful) piano pick for a future model.

Just remember, if you're having problems with your audio, countless people have probably had the same issues before you - it's probably nothing new but a variant of time worn things - maybe as simple as some check box. In the case of Pianoteq, it's a very well behaved VST or standalone software. There's an extremely high probability that your issue (woody, brightness, etc) is not only fixable, but is a non-issue to a great many, esp. pro users.

Pianoteq Studio Bundle (Pro plus all instruments)  - Kawai MP11 digital piano - Yamaha HS8 monitors

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Very good read above about the quality of what equipment  you are using with Pianoteq. I would imagine when using really  high end monitors or headphones the nuances are more easily heard and there for easier to tweak to your or anyone’s liking .  Pretty much like with any instrument and voices.
  Pianoteq is prolly as good as it gets in the software world as a musical instrument, you just need a way to get it out to your ears that is just as good. (Might cost an awful lot I know $$$$)
In one of my setups I just have basic lil M Audio 5s ...added a sub and made a world of difference.

Pianoteq 8, most pianos, Studiologic 73 Piano, Casio Px-560M, PX-S 3000, PX-S 1100, PX-S 7000, Mac i27 and MacBook Pro M3, SS Logic SSL 2

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Since feasiby Modartt can take an impulse response from a piano room and, consequently, take out the undesirable reverberation from piano measurements taken in economical Izotope RX7 software, hopefully, my long overdue, much anticipated, American grand is next! 

I mean to say whenever Modartt’s piano measurements do yield any unwanted room reverberation, the Modartt team may remove it, effectively, economically, from a Baldwin SF-10 Artist Grand model, or, any other American grand, its first American grand model, ostensibly.  No longer is a costly anechoic chamber really necessary, so long as you’ve RX7 to rid your audio measurements of pesky reverberations!

Recently relocated in New York City, a piano belonging to the specifically named (above) piano model was owned by one late great Paul Desmond, before it became the piano in front of which numerous famous jazz artists improvised on their recording sessions (inside of the formally thriving although now defunct jazz club Bradley’s).

Matter-of-factly, it as previously a purely American model is just as significant today as it was yesterday   —since it became featured on countless recording sessions legendary and historic.

Incidentally, many of which have been reissued; its piano recordings appear widely sought still.

Last edited by Amen Ptah Ra (14-04-2019 18:40)
Pianoteq 8 Studio Bundle, Pearl malletSTATION EM1, Roland (DRUM SOUND MODULE TD-30, HandSonic 10, AX-1), Akai EWI USB, Yamaha DIGITAL PIANO P-95, M-Audio STUDIOPHILE BX5, Focusrite Saffire PRO 24 DSP.

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Hi Amen Ptah Ra ... I second your motion for the Baldwin SF-10 Artist Grand

Lanny

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Qexl wrote:

Agree Jake, some US pianos would be cool if possible and perhaps a good PR thing for all.

I'm past the point though where I wonder if we need to ask Modartt to improve

If I can add any new thoughts to the topic, it would be that, I'd probably personally prefer (like others have brought up) something unusual, if not ancient! _DJ_'s historical studies warrant some examination for discovering interesting pianos for the 'library' aspect of it. Some pianos mentioned do already exist (or near enough also in Pianoteq - the letter K the letter Y - and they can be utterly convincing!) - but YMMV with equipment and time spent at it.


I have some of my own thoughts for these 4 comments just above - it made me sit down - apologies if it's a rant - it's just typing quickly some thoughts (been a while):


For those saying it's too bright, there will be others saying it's too dark.

Same for wood comments Others will say "we need more metal". The balance and truths are in there - and a lot will come down to your velocity curve! Seriously - Urs, even just a few days ago, I came to a better velo curve - this after years of always improving it - every year, this keyboard sounds better/more real using Piano - if we don't do this, it's not going to improve anywhere near as much as it can our experience. There's a curve page for keyboards if users are not aware of it.. maybe you can find a user supplied perfect curve - it may change your brains!


1
"Not bright"

A:
So many fixes - *velocity curve*, EQ etc, 30+ interacting params more in Pro


2
"not convincing"

A:
Posting below some links


3
"more wood"

A:
Velocity curve down & or Place a mic under the piano!


4
"should improve existing pianos"

A:
More rubber hits road working from scratch on new pianos - only then, those lessons can be applied to existing pianos... not the other way around Aha!


First thing to say is, that Pianoteq is the last software to deserve to be called such limited things or to inspire concern about stagnation

To sum the above, sometimes it's equipment (do you have an entry level laptop or a million bucks worth of studio? These experiences are different - but with Pianoteq it IS possible to get a close real piano experience, let alone a vastly malleable production tool which, IMO exceeds all other piano software on the market. YMMV - and sometimes that's only because of missing something fixable.. in which case it's maybe minutes or a day away from being solved - how good's that? It may take expenditure to upgrade from 2 inch PC-grade tweeter baubles to speakers/headphones which are more fit for purpose (like taking all the headroom in a piano signal and so on).

IF you're listening on low-grade or entry level equipment, AND you still think something out there sounds better than Pianoteq, then obvs, there's nothing to say other than, you will need to know, nobody will want to hear Piano or anything else on that kind of gear, unless in passing - but if working hard on making a great sound with gear you slaved for - that's where you find satisfaction.. and on good gear (and in studio etc.) it means Pianoteq is miles in front - and in many other ways too.


On the subject of having the right equipment for the best results:

Here's what others had to say. Applies. Applies.


I wish everyone gets their dream piano, I sincerely do.. (or we all do with a 'great Library wonder' of all the world's pianos! with Modartt tech) until this time.. here's something I think I overlooked for way too long - esp. inre comment #2 mentioned above about "convincing":


Here's a link to a MP3 of a song called "Man With A Musical Lighter" from the Pianoteq reference page by Steve Nieve.

Seriously - Listen to that, U4 recorded using Pianoteq version 4! not 5 or 6 - then look at who he's worked with (there are ~20 Grammy winners/nominees on that page alone - not that there are only Grammy folks there, but the long list of these exceptional artists and professionals, all worth checking out, are saying similar cool things about Pianoteq which gel 100% with my experiences.

Look at who all these people work(ed) with! Forgot about this page or failed to find it in the past - I love Steve's contributions - and there are others using Pianoteq there - note, these people have taken time to do that - allowing us to see some little gems.

All that is not meant to diminish the incredible and superb contributions on the Recordings featuring Pianoteq page. Stunning stuff abounds there all day long! and it's wonderful to get time to go in for a listen to what others are doing here - clearly displaying what's being done, not just what might be possible - and you can get many of these kinds of results by exporting from inside Pianoteq and maybe some learning on top, to find best reverb types or mic settings etc. and I personally know several good people there who sincerely HAVE spent time learning more of that side of things, so that their experience, and output is vastly improved - that's old fashioned though I suppose hehe ;p That's my "Dad vibe" - "Hey kids, cheer up, the old TV isn't colour but Wacko the clown is on after these pomade ads - get yer spam crispies and si'down and be happy".

Many of these people use Pianoteq to the full - and I expect, will keep using it as it improves - goes without saying IMO - then consider if it's "convincing" - then consider you may just need to work on something (like your speakers, or keyboard, or velocity curve, or EQ settings to suit your earphones etc.. none of this is avoidable even for professionals IF the goal is "good sound"). A little more pause before you say such things esp. to those who also don't know what's possible, please?

Otherwise it begins to look like some negative SEO campaign, and please don't be silly enough to get dragged in to support it.

I know and fear that this mayn't sound like humble criticism - but it's well intentioned I assure all of you! - it's natural to not be aware of how to make a nice recording before you have some experience and some tools apropos to the task - but you learn these things with time and efforts taken (osmosis is as good or way better than didactic rote learning IMO) - you don't just say "This hammer sucks" if you don't know how to swing it, right? You learn, you hit your thumb a few times, you ask for help, someone teaches you enough to get you past the "Aha!" phase, the rest is history, erm, sometime in the future.. That's all

Here's Steve Nieve's quote, in case time doesn't permit clicking through above (Apologies to post this here - but it's so pertinent - it's someone who's posted beautiful MP3s for us using version 4 and has such an exceptional career in music - and not only would I take his word before most forum posters here, I'd recommend you go further and read all the others like Steve who are not only amazing people, but are probably taking Pianoteq for what it is.. and happily:

Steve Nieve wrote:

I have always been impressed by the results I am able to achieve with Pianoteq. It sounds as natural or as unnatural as I want. Pianoteq's sound editing facilities make it extremely versatile for the modern pianist with an ear to fine audio tuning. I love the slider that sets the condition of the piano from pristine to totally destroyed. The designers have thought to everything, but have managed to maintain a simple interface which never gets in the way of musical creativity. All the add ons sound equally realistic and the other important dimension is the effects section, absolutely wonderful and simple to operate. Another important consideration, the superb responsiveness of this software, that sets it apart from all other virtual pianos. Every style of music that I'm interested in is instantly playable on Pianoteq. I love working, playing and creating music with this incredibly powerful, deceptively simple software

You notice, he didn't say "It's not convincing" - because he has learned how to use it - simple as that.

I can use cornflakes out of the box (b'dum tish!) but there's more to your best possible audio results than owning a laptop and sticking a keyboard in.

That page - full of Grammy Award winners and nominees and others at the apex of their musical careers - read their words. It FITS with my experience - not the comments of users who may need to change something in their own workflow - said with love! (I'm out there on the forum often trying my best to help people get the best out of it) and hope this helps inspire some users to take stock, maybe 'get real' to an extent and get moving to improve their own room/speakers/hardware/keyboard

Go at it..

Back on topic - I've previously posted my highly unlikely (but beautiful) piano pick for a future model.

Just remember, if you're having problems with your audio, countless people have probably had the same issues before you - it's probably nothing new but a variant of time worn things - maybe as simple as some check box. In the case of Pianoteq, it's a very well behaved VST or standalone software. There's an extremely high probability that your issue (woody, brightness, etc) is not only fixable, but is a non-issue to a great many, esp. pro users.


But if you knew the setting I use, which I prefer, you would laugh at me: I use Stainway D Home, stereophonic mode (no microphone), the stereo width at the maximum level (5), with effects and reverb off. This configuration is, besides extremely light, very rich and faithful. In my opinion, it brings a perfect balance between wood and metal, with very broad and pure nuances of dynamics, without "contamination".

Respeito, Esforço e Sabedoria

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Maybe I've messed up with "more wood" above. I rather meant that the wood should sound more realistic. So that the sound gets under the skin.

Pianoteq 7 Pro with all pianos

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Urs Zimmermann wrote:

Maybe I've messed up with "more wood" above. I rather meant that the wood should sound more realistic. So that the sound gets under the skin.

I quite agree too.
Bruno

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Professor Leandro Duarte wrote:

But if you knew the setting I use, which I prefer, you would laugh at me: I use Stainway D Home, stereophonic mode (no microphone), the stereo width at the maximum level (5), with effects and reverb off. This configuration is, besides extremely light, very rich and faithful. In my opinion, it brings a perfect balance between wood and metal, with very broad and pure nuances of dynamics, without "contamination".

That setting seems sensible enough to me. Whatever sounds good on your system. Stereo width is not something that I had paid much attention to, but I agree that increasing the width does bring a nice sense of 'presence' to some presets, so I will experiment with that.

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Sorry if I caused confusion above - I like expressing myself and hoping there's some useful things which come of it. Just wish to express that I think there may be some unexplored settings leading to some users' concerns over brightness or wooded timbre. Like always, more info would help greatly in understand the shorter statements.

I don't think anyone messed up sorry to give that off - mostly just saying more data required and I hope new users don't feel bummed and letting them know, not all of us think it's not bright enough or woody enough already - I am in that camp, although I know of many ways I'd like to see improvement occur too.

Pianoteq is surely continuing to improve I have no doubts about this - just pointing out my opinion that it is capable of those things mentioned to a high spec. already in my experience.

Also I believe Modartt does exceptionally well to balance the inclusions in updates against the resistant markers such as user CPU etc. into the deliverable (imagine if CPU and speed across all components were still increasing like the 90s-2000s - I think a lot more would be able to be input by now if that were the case).


To Kramster1 - I think a lot of things can be positively affected with no new expenditure required, with tools built in or in a DAW - hope that's the main gist


To Professor Leandro Duarte, I love what people are doing to make it sound the way they want (the more of it the better), whether it's with interesting speaker placements in existing cabs etc. or transducers and soundboards etc. - and never would I laugh at what anyone does like cutting reverb and effects, quite the reverse I can understand this works in situations, the default model without treatment is extremely close to the original instrument. Your settings are probably right in the ballpark for a player perspective sound I'd like! Getting into the settings additive and subtractive is something I'm very enthusiastic about.

Mostly my focus would lie with Pianoteq in a recording setting, but I'm ever mindful of 'real piano in situ' too. That distinction I believe has often been confusing to conversations about virtual instruments.. when one says "real", others are thinking "that particular piano I heard on a great recording" which was probably subject to a lot of processing. We have a great tool for both of these worlds and the blur in-between.


To Urs and bruno - although I still wonder the exact meaning (almost physically sensed but still acoustic vibrations given off by the wood?) - here I offer an EQ treatment which might help in your attempts at a more wooded timbre:

Try this on the Steingraeber (maybe the most pronounced wooded sound in collection) as starting point and work back down from it - similar for any other piano.

Copy the next para and right-click paste it into the EQ interface (the EQ behind the big button)..

Equalizer = [60, 66, 78, 340, 390, 476, 560, 2470, 3160, 4700, 10100, 16000; -25.0, -2.5, 0, 0, -5.0, -5.0, -2.6, -2.0, +0.1, +1.5, +0.5, -3.2]

Visually, you see some cuts mostly and a dip in a small mid range either side of 500kHz.

In the effects panel, have 2 EQU3 instances set.

Then right click the EQU3 dots, from left to right, and type these values in as starting point (alter Q and freq. to liking of course for the piano)..


1st EQU3:

Freq    150
Gain    -1
Q        0.50

Freq    438
Gain    +5
Q        2.00

Freq    5000
Gain    +2
Q        0.66


2nd EQU3:

Freq    75
Gain    +4
Q        1.00

Freq    504
Gain    +5
Q        2.00

Freq    3500
Gain    +3.5
Q        1.00


Visually, you see small peaks in the mids which you can importantly lower or raise to make more subtle or pronounced if it suits the room. (confluences between the main EQ's dip in that range - and these small pushed regions is a feature - as is pushing the bass and treble in the second in series - I feel that gives similar positives like using a kind of exciter but without affecting the entire range and gives a little soft depth contrast because 'something' is 'making up' the gain - I like that ghost in this machine).

Frequency 438 (nearly 440) and Frequency 504 (just over 500) create some banging artefacts for a lot of music with standard 440 diapason - note if you make those dots to be exactly 440 and 500, then you may get something extremely pronounced, almost like soft feedback - of course piano diapason at 440 means that's lining up too strongly with a lot of straight lines in harmonic terms - so by harnessing a real world physical property in wood (cabinets + sound boards responding, being excited to strong vibrations by strong frequencies in essence - and our 'off' numbers break the ringing hold on them - pushing them but not letting it keep ringing out) there is a heightened sense of a large body of wood vibration "throwing" noise to us delivered by these neighbouring mids. Similar things can be found with different frequencies. A mic under the piano in the mix (fig 8 standing up is nice, top bubble crossing theoretically up through the cab, moved around to find the frequencies that add wood tones and the lower bubble covers sound at floor level - you could reverse polarity for a more 'corky' substrate).

The small changes to the numbers adds some fuzz to the effect, more realism. You may experience likeable 'beating' in some chords so, tune those frequency figures to suit the music if needed - closer or wider apart.

To me, these numbers help find and bring out some mids without making it boxy - but hope this gives you and others a nice starting point to breathe some more woody tone in without too much destructive editing.

You might find that it works really well with a lick of medium hall reverb with mostly medium settings (those tones seem to carry the sound away from us nicely).

Perhaps, in that case, it may be a popular thing to have more presets supplied with each new piano? Like the D preset "Hyper bright" for example plus others like something "Dark", something "Wooded" etc. and maybe some more experimental ones too? I get the feeling that some would like that, but there would also be users who would see too many, and esp. too many modern ones as off-putting? ("A serious piano software shouldn't have all these strange sounds - that's not real") - and around it goes I suppose - glad it's not my call to make. But I do know way more is possible than a lot of esp. newer users know.

More on woody sound - and another example of older version of Pianoteq killing it.

The other piano piece by Steve Nieve is posted to this thread because, this one was done with the Bluethner also at version 4 while others were on the forum talking about what it lacks

I love the use of the whole range - you get a lovely sense of bass mid and treble parts as separate elements in the music singing together so well. Harmonies some subtle as the changes. Simple but so pure and intelligent, the timing, I feel the cabinet profoundly, the harp vibrating inside, the high notes sparking through, the string tensions. It all sounds as if it's there. No imagination required on my part. Maybe he just exported this, or maybe worked on EQ but either way, that was doable in version 4. To me, version 6 is even more detail rich than this.

Pianoteq Bluethner ver. 4 "Keyboard Jungle" by Steve Nieve

That piano gives me chills, gets under my skin at volume (as much as the song itself - a great match up IMO - Steve loves his Steinway but here the Bluethner seems to be a sublime match), as does the version 6 at volume - I can practically feel the felt on the strings and feel the bass rumbling into the lower mids dreamily and beating through the box, bouncing off the lid almost. I'm there. I get that it's not possible to fully experience it on every system - but I'm listening on cheap consumer headphones on an aging laptop with standard sound and can sense this.

Compared to other software pianos, this is way out beyond. Others may have an already-produced sound, but they're stuck with that and it sounds like everyone else using it sounds and it's one piano, whereas this is many and infinitely varied.

I'll probably always want to chime in to say this kind of thing if I can't process a short negative statement with little to go on. New and potential users don't deserve to leave with the impression that Pianoteq is lacking in sweeping ways.

I'm the type of person nowadays, willing to critique something, esp. when I think there could be a solution - and I do like to attach a solution if I think I have one worth sharing - I'd just like to suggest to others (not tell!) that extra info could really help others in taking their ideas in. But that's just me - I know the world carries on regardless

Pianoteq Studio Bundle (Pro plus all instruments)  - Kawai MP11 digital piano - Yamaha HS8 monitors

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Qexl, you did not cause any confusion, on the contrary, you presented your thesis and brought many clarifications. This is what the Forum is all about. The discussion that you proposed contributed much to the understanding of many points that were ignored even by me, but I could learn by reading your post and that of the other friends of this Forum.

Respeito, Esforço e Sabedoria

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Lately, I have been reading a lot of off topic posts including tangents  —but no new piano suggestion like a Baldwin for one.

Last edited by Amen Ptah Ra (08-03-2019 15:24)
Pianoteq 8 Studio Bundle, Pearl malletSTATION EM1, Roland (DRUM SOUND MODULE TD-30, HandSonic 10, AX-1), Akai EWI USB, Yamaha DIGITAL PIANO P-95, M-Audio STUDIOPHILE BX5, Focusrite Saffire PRO 24 DSP.

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Urs Zimmermann wrote:

Maybe I've messed up with "more wood" above. I rather meant that the wood should sound more realistic. So that the sound gets under the skin.

Well said indeed. Of course, “woody” en “more wood” are interpretive terms but they do point to a specific feeling that seems to be present in the Blüthner and Steingraeber.

Pianoteq Pro Studio with Bösendorfer, Shigeru Kawai and Organteq

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Qexl wrote:

Sorry if I caused confusion above - I like expressing myself and hoping there's some useful things which come of it. Just wish to express that I think there may be some unexplored settings leading to some users' concerns over brightness or wooded timbre. Like always, more info would help greatly in understand the shorter statements.

I don't think anyone messed up sorry to give that off - mostly just saying more data required and I hope new users don't feel bummed and letting them know, not all of us think it's not bright enough or woody enough already - I am in that camp, although I know of many ways I'd like to see improvement occur too.

Pianoteq is surely continuing to improve I have no doubts about this - just pointing out my opinion that it is capable of those things mentioned to a high spec. already in my experience.

Also I believe Modartt does exceptionally well to balance the inclusions in updates against the resistant markers such as user CPU etc. into the deliverable (imagine if CPU and speed across all components were still increasing like the 90s-2000s - I think a lot more would be able to be input by now if that were the case).

To Urs and bruno - although I still wonder the exact meaning (almost physically sensed but still acoustic vibrations given off by the wood?) - here I offer an EQ treatment which might help in your attempts at a more wooded timbre:

Try this on the Steingraeber (maybe the most pronounced wooded sound in collection) as starting point and work back down from it - similar for any other piano.

Copy the next para and right-click paste it into the EQ interface (the EQ behind the big button)..

Equalizer = [60, 66, 78, 340, 390, 476, 560, 2470, 3160, 4700, 10100, 16000; -25.0, -2.5, 0, 0, -5.0, -5.0, -2.6, -2.0, +0.1, +1.5, +0.5, -3.2]

Visually, you see some cuts mostly and a dip in a small mid range either side of 500kHz.

In the effects panel, have 2 EQU3 instances set.

Then right click the EQU3 dots, from left to right, and type these values in as starting point (alter Q and freq. to liking of course for the piano)..


1st EQU3:

Freq    150
Gain    -1
Q        0.50

Freq    438
Gain    +5
Q        2.00

Freq    5000
Gain    +2
Q        0.66


2nd EQU3:

Freq    75
Gain    +4
Q        1.00

Freq    504
Gain    +5
Q        2.00

Freq    3500
Gain    +3.5
Q        1.00


Visually, you see small peaks in the mids which you can importantly lower or raise to make more subtle or pronounced if it suits the room. (confluences between the main EQ's dip in that range - and these small pushed regions is a feature - as is pushing the bass and treble in the second in series - I feel that gives similar positives like using a kind of exciter but without affecting the entire range and gives a little soft depth contrast because 'something' is 'making up' the gain - I like that ghost in this machine).

Frequency 438 (nearly 440) and Frequency 504 (just over 500) create some banging artefacts for a lot of music with standard 440 diapason - note if you make those dots to be exactly 440 and 500, then you may get something extremely pronounced, almost like soft feedback - of course piano diapason at 440 means that's lining up too strongly with a lot of straight lines in harmonic terms - so by harnessing a real world physical property in wood (cabinets + sound boards responding, being excited to strong vibrations by strong frequencies in essence - and our 'off' numbers break the ringing hold on them - pushing them but not letting it keep ringing out) there is a heightened sense of a large body of wood vibration "throwing" noise to us delivered by these neighbouring mids. Similar things can be found with different frequencies. A mic under the piano in the mix (fig 8 standing up is nice, top bubble crossing theoretically up through the cab, moved around to find the frequencies that add wood tones and the lower bubble covers sound at floor level - you could reverse polarity for a more 'corky' substrate).

The small changes to the numbers adds some fuzz to the effect, more realism. You may experience likeable 'beating' in some chords so, tune those frequency figures to suit the music if needed - closer or wider apart.

To me, these numbers help find and bring out some mids without making it boxy - but hope this gives you and others a nice starting point to breathe some more woody tone in without too much destructive editing.

You might find that it works really well with a lick of medium hall reverb with mostly medium settings (those tones seem to carry the sound away from us nicely).

Perhaps, in that case, it may be a popular thing to have more presets supplied with each new piano? Like the D preset "Hyper bright" for example plus others like something "Dark", something "Wooded" etc. and maybe some more experimental ones too? I get the feeling that some would like that, but there would also be users who would see too many, and esp. too many modern ones as off-putting? ("A serious piano software shouldn't have all these strange sounds - that's not real") - and around it goes I suppose - glad it's not my call to make. But I do know way more is possible than a lot of esp. newer users know.

More on woody sound - and another example of older version of Pianoteq killing it.

The other piano piece by Steve Nieve is posted to this thread because, this one was done with the Bluethner also at version 4 while others were on the forum talking about what it lacks

I love the use of the whole range - you get a lovely sense of bass mid and treble parts as separate elements in the music singing together so well. Harmonies some subtle as the changes. Simple but so pure and intelligent, the timing, I feel the cabinet profoundly, the harp vibrating inside, the high notes sparking through, the string tensions. It all sounds as if it's there. No imagination required on my part. Maybe he just exported this, or maybe worked on EQ but either way, that was doable in version 4. To me, version 6 is even more detail rich than this.

Pianoteq Bluethner ver. 4 "Keyboard Jungle" by Steve Nieve

That piano gives me chills, gets under my skin at volume (as much as the song itself - a great match up IMO - Steve loves his Steinway but here the Bluethner seems to be a sublime match), as does the version 6 at volume - I can practically feel the felt on the strings and feel the bass rumbling into the lower mids dreamily and beating through the box, bouncing off the lid almost. I'm there. I get that it's not possible to fully experience it on every system - but I'm listening on cheap consumer headphones on an aging laptop with standard sound and can sense this.

Compared to other software pianos, this is way out beyond. Others may have an already-produced sound, but they're stuck with that and it sounds like everyone else using it sounds and it's one piano, whereas this is many and infinitely varied.

I'll probably always want to chime in to say this kind of thing if I can't process a short negative statement with little to go on. New and potential users don't deserve to leave with the impression that Pianoteq is lacking in sweeping ways.

I'm the type of person nowadays, willing to critique something, esp. when I think there could be a solution - and I do like to attach a solution if I think I have one worth sharing - I'd just like to suggest to others (not tell!) that extra info could really help others in taking their ideas in. But that's just me - I know the world carries on regardless

I just tried to apply this wooden equalization on my initial .fxp of bosendorfer 200 V0.8 (not V0.82) made from the Bluther model basically set by sskuk1 in ptq 5.2 (with spectrum profile that I had built from 2 Rode M5 mics in XY position at 70 cm from the dampers + rescale 1/4 without further modification pianoteq)
I then regenerated from this .fxp 351fandm_Fantasia_no3_in_D_K397_WaMozart_ptqBosen200v0.83testWooden.mid (see in the "Other files" menu this last mp3 file)
The result is very variable depending on the headphones used (I played with Kennerton Thror, Kennerton Odin, Senneiser HD800 then Stax SR-007 MKII) However, in any case, I find the sound in my opinion a little confused between E3 and E4 (mid 063 and 076).
In my opinion, it would be an improvement of the model Bluthner to make it (without equalization) still a little more realistic on the resonance of the case and the soundboard. Either (or both) have the possibility in Pianoteq pro to set a "spectrum profile dedicated to the case and the soundboard", ideally note by note, independently of the spectrum profile currently dedicated - apparently - mainly to hammers and to the strings. I do not know if the mathematical model is compatible with such a setting, but I have the feeling that the current soundboard design parameters are insufficient to adjust precisely this. (Naturally I have full confidence in the Modartt team to continue to improve this point). I hope to be quickly contradicted by a complementary solution with the current product, for the benefit of all of us, being far from mastering the combination of all parameters of Pianoteq pro ...
I take advantage of this post, to indicate also that for the notes medium and treble, I meet in the spectrum real profile note by note of my acoustic bosen 200, peaks that do not correspond to any of the frequencies of the partial ones proposed in the spectrum profile note by note of pianoteq pro, this regardless of the length of string set. (which must of course be adjusted initially to try to have a maximum of harmonics in phase with the frequencies proposed by the spectrum profile tool of pianoteq - different string stiffness between Bosen and Bluthner ?, other parameters of string resonance no - yet - taken into account in the model implementation ?)
The observation is in any case for me quite exciting.
In any case it would be interesting to be able to understand a little more precisely (may be in connection with a very simplified explanation of the model) at which stage of the sound generation processing intervene the different parameters of Pianoteq pro currently proposed)

I am naturally aware that these EQ settings were originally planned for a Steingraeber ptq preset. Which Steingraeber preset exactly?
If possible, what equalization settings would you recommend in the case of the Bluethner (and if possible also in the specific case of the Bluthner originally modified by sskuk1 to simulate a bosendorfer?)

Bruno

Last edited by bm (09-03-2019 13:44)

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

LTECpiano wrote:

Hi Amen Ptah Ra ... I second your motion for the Baldwin SF-10 Artist Grand

Lanny

Thank you, Lanny!

Perhaps you share my view, from Baldwin its contribution to modern music has already been well established and documented, amongst American recording engineers and artists, and, other music industry professionals. 

If you will, just have a look at some of the names associated with the Baldwin:

Numerous distinguished musicians have chosen to compose, perform or record from Baldwin pianos, including the pianists Walter Gieseking, Claudio Arrau, Jorge Bolet, Morton Estrin, Earl Wild and José Iturbi and the composers Aaron Copland, Philip Glass, Igor Stravinsky, Béla Bartók, Stephen Sondheim, Leonard Bernstein, Lukas Foss and John WilliamsBaldwin pianos have been used by popular entertainers including Ray Charles, Liberace, Richard Carpenter, Michael Feinstein, Billy Joel, Cat Stevens, and Carly Simon, and jazz pianists Dave Brubeck, George Shearing and Dick HymanAmy Lee, the lead vocalist, pianist and keyboardist of Evanescence also uses this brand in most of her compositions, recordings and live performances.  A Baldwin piano was seen nightly as it was played by Paul Shaffer on the Late Show with David LettermanBaldwin was the official piano of the television show GleeMarian McPartland's long-running radio show Piano Jazz was hosted by BaldwinBaldwin was second only to Steinway in its artist and symphony roster.

When I was a youngster, Baldwin was featured on about every T.V. variety show or music special that aired.  The Carpenters’ specials were certainly no exception; Richard Carpenter’s obvious choice inside A&M Records was a Baldwin.  The brand was instrumental for any who composed, performed, and recorded, and used in over hundreds of Hollywood blockbuster productions like Superman, Star Wars, Jurrasic Park, and Raiders of the Lost Ark  —just as John Williams’ discography attests.

Clearly, Lanny, if like me you want your Pianoteq copy to eventually match sounds from the major American studios, such as those coming specifically from Hollywood, and, with a high degree of accuracy, authenticity and integrity, you’ll just have to let the people at Modartt kindly know you would like to get a process started, one towards a possible future Modartt Pianoteq piano physically modelled from ostensibly the Baldwin itself, if it’s really the piano subject of forum discussion (that is) in and out of its own thread regularly.

Recently, I read an indication that Modartt people respond to a gentle nudge.

Last edited by Amen Ptah Ra (20-03-2019 18:10)
Pianoteq 8 Studio Bundle, Pearl malletSTATION EM1, Roland (DRUM SOUND MODULE TD-30, HandSonic 10, AX-1), Akai EWI USB, Yamaha DIGITAL PIANO P-95, M-Audio STUDIOPHILE BX5, Focusrite Saffire PRO 24 DSP.

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Definitely love the idea of the Baldwin SF-10 - it would be pretty darn fine. Thanks for the interesting posts Amen - very cool links giving a fantastic idea of why many would love it as I would I'm sure.

Overall, quite the interesting list as it stands:

  • Bösendorfer - 28

  • Fazioli - 23

  • Yamaha - 19

  • Ravenscroft - 9

  • Baldwin - 8

  • Kawai - 6

  • Erard - 5

  • Faziolo - 4 ;-)

  • Mason & Hamlin - 4

  • Essenfelder - 4

  • Una Corda - 4

  • Stuart & Sons - 3

  • Estonia - 3

  • No more pianos, more improvements instead - 3

  • Chickering - 2

  • Antunes fortepiano - 2

  • Doppio Borgato - 2

  • Bechstein (studio size) - 2

  • Felt Piano - 2

  • Clavicords in gen. - 2

  • David Klavins - 2

  • Stein - 2

  • Streicher - 2

  • Boisselot - 2

  • Wurlitzer - 2

  • Schimmel - 1

  • August Förster - 1

  • Modarrt - it be mentioned but once me hearties! By an aquatic, furry, egg layin' mammal with a beak, aye.. it were a Platypus wot spake it - RRrrrr and shiver me timbres!



The above is o'course the number of times each piano brand is mentioned so far as a singular data point - including where a user quoted another in order to express support for that piano. Minor curatorial touches to eliminate redundancy etc. esp. considering the below - also collated just for fun, convenience and light conversation.


Went back to have another bite at the pianos listed while manually sed-awk-grepping the above list.


Just like to say, as far as evidence in favour of any of these pianos, the superb video link provided by Stephen_Doonan to a Rachmaninov piece (Morceaux de fantaisie Op. 3, 1 Elegie in E-flat min) played marvelously by Armands Abols! on an Estonia Concert Grand 274 piano is entirely out of this world. I can listen on repeat - will have to listen again - excellent recording for a YouTube vid too.. just worth another word of WOW for that one. I feel that it would be an excellent piano to play and the modelling I guess would also be tremendous fun as much as a engaging challenge. I isolation, some harmonics are 'fuzzy' in a dreamy way which I love (different/related/softer than/Alaquot etc and seeming to keep to a full dry 5th or so/? need more time - loving it so much).

Just putting this line as a stopper on that - I could go on - thinking it's my top interest among the list of modern grands for now.

I didn't feel as attached (maybe the audio) but the Essenfelder piano posted by Beto Music is also one I've a new found interest in - thanks! An effortless kind of sound with that one in vid seeming to be swimmingly rich with almost casual stateliness. I'm going to seek more recordings - it would be a lovely sound to play and so alive by the sound of that footage.

And another mention of admiration for the listings and videos for the historic collectors - thanks Davey Jones and others in the support of these wonderful early pianos. They gave humanity such playful vistas down through to the morose - it's a joy to listen to the videos posted.

Talking about a U.S. made piano, I think the idea of Modartt bringing out a McNulty Liszt is an inspired idea @Davey Jones. Old tech, new world, old piano, new version.. latest tech and all. A stack, or actually an avalanche of cool things. Everyone happy across the Atlantic.




...

Venturing beyond the Kuiper belt and hurtling a bit further still.. and in spirit of the love of learning (and in thanks to others here who love to ponder these things!).


@bruno - cheers - excellent ideas. I think that the surfacing of this kind of fleshing out of ideas is way more useful to all than may seem on face value.

New thread worthy (Feel free to copy the settings and begin a thread with explorations - happy to join in or start it in coming days).

I agree now with Amen Ptah Ra that this tangent has exceeded the gravitational forces and needs its own thread in future - but tying up for now below..


Yes, there's always that notion of 'how much needs to be in the model' and "all of it" is always the answer CPU permitting, I don't think Philippe or the team at Modartt will ever stop thinking of new ways to add and optimise. It keeps me awake at times, always tweaking in new ways and discovering just how much has been already thought out and included which can be logically and artistically worked with.

For more inre the wooded tones earlier discussed, here is a 'pushed' wooded Bluethner "Player" preset setting example you may like to work back from (maybe even halve the gain value as a first order thing, and/or make thinner peaks with Q for example). You may also move frequencies wider or narrower (they are here to display closeness to too much ringing - just to clarify, the settings are not finished for any purpose but exemplary in purpose only - although, this does make the basis for a personal preset so I'm also not saying any of it is ultimately wrong either, just pushed. As an FXP it mightn't be really helpful without all this context perhaps - maybe a polished version might though - feel free to use these settings in your own presets! is all I can say in support of that - I keep wanting more time for doing FXPs for other users and should go for it myself too, note to self and all that jazz - I am grateful to those who do this for others and should link to the page for those who might not know about the Pianoteq FXP Corner section - access via the menu at top of page if not sure how to get back there).

Equalizer = [60, 66, 78, 350, 420, 565, 750, 875, 1490, 1770, 2030, 2450, 3300, 4750, 10100, 16000; -25.0, -2.5, 0, -2.0, -5.5, -4.1, -6.5, -2.5, -2.1, -5.0, -1.5, -1.5, +0.5, +1.5, +0.6, -1.5]

and the EQU3 dots:

1st EQU3:

Freq    125
Gain    -3.0
Q        0.50

Freq    416
Gain    +4.0
Q        3.00

Freq    2100
Gain    +3.5
Q        0.66

2nd EQU3:

Freq    110
Gain    +3.0
Q        1.00

Freq    754
Gain    +4.0
Q        3.00

Freq    3500
Gain    +4.0
Q        1.00



I think that's a good starting point with some mid point Piano Room 1 reverb, room size 24.53, duration 1.52, mix +3.2 with +0.05 tone, tail/early refl. -8.8, pre-delay like 0.008 (although if exporting/recording, I might lean to a small hall convolution reverb in Pianoteq instead).

And also a delay effect like this added to this preset for something extra to go with the above:

mix 12
delay 5
feedback 0
tone +0.13

unison width 1.24
unison balance +0.20

impedance 1.09
cutoff 1
Q factor 1

Sympathetic resonance 0.73
Aliquot strings 1.00

Hammers Piano 0.24
Mezzo 0.72
Forte 1.6


I like dynamics at around 50 (but that's because of my own keys, curve, desire for overhead or headroom etc..) - of course keys are going to feel different for anyone else's setup (which is why I strongly advocate to tweak from existing defaults to suit room/style etc - they already work well with many systems).

In the least, just hoping to illustrate something worth taking on board about carving out and pushing back some mid range EQ - ideas to gain some smoky wood resonances without overpowering the rest. Can't be said enough, these things and more are indeed at the heart of many albums we hear, in particularly heavily produced audio. Pianoteq floors us with options!

By adding a mic under the soundboard and raising stereo image to 4.22 it gets quite a natural sound ringing (even so, this still works well with some bombastic playing, speakers and headphones, as much as even-handed pieces IMO - esp. with tweaking to 'lesser' extent down from these initial pushed start points - closer to home defaults - you may like to push only a few things a little to bring forward quite a lot more wooded timbre).

Still confident, over time, more will be coming to knock our collective socks off.

Someone recently commented IRL while I was playing this preset tweak "What's that piano, it sounds like Tom Waits" (from "The Piano Has Been Drinking). I get it, there's something they heard and I didn't aim for that piano sound, but it gave them this. That was with pushed settings - the extra character - I might feel it needs less but there may be plenty of people who want more character than I sometimes guess too.

Again, worth saying I'm thrilled that Pianoteq progresses by default in time with even further progress into more realism.

Taking that as a given, always looking forward with appreciation to the next piano and the next. [pre edit to add - no time left to edit - may be some glaring errors - hope not]

Pianoteq Studio Bundle (Pro plus all instruments)  - Kawai MP11 digital piano - Yamaha HS8 monitors

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Qexl wrote:

For more inre the wooded tones earlier discussed, here is a 'pushed' wooded Bluethner "Player" preset setting example you may like to work back from (maybe even halve the gain value as a first order thing, and/or make thinner peaks with Q for example). You may also move frequencies wider or narrower (they are here to display closeness to too much ringing - just to clarify, the settings are not finished for any purpose but exemplary in purpose only - although, this does make the basis for a personal preset so I'm also not saying any of it is ultimately wrong either, just pushed. As an FXP it mightn't be really helpful without all this context perhaps - maybe a polished version might though - feel free to use these settings in your own presets! is all I can say in support of that - I keep wanting more time for doing FXPs for other users and should go for it myself too, note to self and all that jazz - I am grateful to those who do this for others and should link to the page for those who might not know about the Pianoteq FXP Corner section - access via the menu at top of page if not sure how to get back there).

Equalizer = [60, 66, 78, 350, 420, 565, 750, 875, 1490, 1770, 2030, 2450, 3300, 4750, 10100, 16000; -25.0, -2.5, 0, -2.0, -5.5, -4.1, -6.5, -2.5, -2.1, -5.0, -1.5, -1.5, +0.5, +1.5, +0.6, -1.5]

and the EQU3 dots:

1st EQU3:

Freq    125
Gain    -3.0
Q        0.50

Freq    416
Gain    +4.0
Q        3.00

Freq    2100
Gain    +3.5
Q        0.66

2nd EQU3:

Freq    110
Gain    +3.0
Q        1.00

Freq    754
Gain    +4.0
Q        3.00

Freq    3500
Gain    +4.0
Q        1.00



I think that's a good starting point with some mid point Piano Room 1 reverb, room size 24.53, duration 1.52, mix +3.2 with +0.05 tone, tail/early refl. -8.8, pre-delay like 0.008 (although if exporting/recording, I might lean to a small hall convolution reverb in Pianoteq instead).

And also a delay effect like this added to this preset for something extra to go with the above:

mix 12
delay 5
feedback 0
tone +0.13

unison width 1.24
unison balance +0.20

impedance 1.09
cutoff 1
Q factor 1

Sympathetic resonance 0.73
Aliquot strings 1.00

Hammers Piano 0.24
Mezzo 0.72
Forte 1.6


I like dynamics at around 50 (but that's because of my own keys, curve, desire for overhead or headroom etc..) - of course keys are going to feel different for anyone else's setup (which is why I strongly advocate to tweak from existing defaults to suit room/style etc - they already work well with many systems).

In the least, just hoping to illustrate something worth taking on board about carving out and pushing back some mid range EQ - ideas to gain some smoky wood resonances without overpowering the rest. Can't be said enough, these things and more are indeed at the heart of many albums we hear, in particularly heavily produced audio. Pianoteq floors us with options!

By adding a mic under the soundboard and raising stereo image to 4.22 it gets quite a natural sound ringing (even so, this still works well with some bombastic playing, speakers and headphones, as much as even-handed pieces IMO - esp. with tweaking to 'lesser' extent down from these initial pushed start points - closer to home defaults - you may like to push only a few things a little to bring forward quite a lot more wooded timbre).

Still confident, over time, more will be coming to knock our collective socks off.

Someone recently commented IRL while I was playing this preset tweak "What's that piano, it sounds like Tom Waits" (from "The Piano Has Been Drinking). I get it, there's something they heard and I didn't aim for that piano sound, but it gave them this. That was with pushed settings - the extra character - I might feel it needs less but there may be plenty of people who want more character than I sometimes guess too.

Again, worth saying I'm thrilled that Pianoteq progresses by default in time with even further progress into more realism.

Taking that as a given, always looking forward with appreciation to the next piano and the next. [pre edit to add - no time left to edit - may be some glaring errors - hope not]

Thank you very much for this illustration of a wooden profile on the preset Bluthener player. There is indeed material to work.
By trying this setting on the Bluthner preset then Bosen200, I found again a relatively different result depending on the headphone model. (Rather natural on Sennheiser HD800 for example). I have also tried the solution of a virtual mic under the soundboard that actually improves the wooden character, especially with an enlarged stereo image.

Bruno

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Bruno: The demo's that you posted on the "Other files" page are remarkably good. But I'm a little confused. The fxp's that you used to create these are based on Qexl's EQ settings according to the description on the far right side of the page. But the fxp's you uploaded to the FXP page instead say that they were derived from your Bos. So the fxp's have nothing to do with the "Other file" mp3's, correct? If so, could you post an fxp or set of fxp's that you used to create the demos on the "Other files" page?

In any event, these fxps and recordings sound wonderful. I'm especially drawn to the one that uses the Steingraeber. Very dry and near-mic'ed: https://www.forum-pianoteq.com/uploads....190307.mp3


About the fxp that derived from your Bos: Can you walk us through what you did--what program did you use for the analysis? You then went into Pianoteq's Spectrum Profile and edited each note individually?  I ask because some notes seem to be edited, and some not, in the profile.

Last edited by Jake Johnson (13-03-2019 16:28)

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Jake Johnson wrote:

Bruno: The demo's that you posted on the "Other files" page are remarkably good. But I'm a little confused. The fxp's that you used to create these are based on Qexl's EQ settings according to the description on the far right side of the page. But the fxp's you uploaded to the FXP page instead say that they were derived from your Bos. So the fxp's have nothing to do with the "Other file" mp3's, correct? If so, could you post an fxp or set of fxp's that you used to create the demos on the "Other files" page?

In any event, these fxps and recordings sound wonderful. I'm especially drawn to the one that uses the Steingraeber. Very dry and near-mic'ed: https://www.forum-pianoteq.com/uploads....190307.mp3


About the fxp that derived from your Bos: Can you walk us through what you did--what program did you use for the analysis? You then went into Pianoteq's Spectrum Profile and edited each note individually?  I ask because some notes seem to be edited, and some not, in the profile.

I had actually uploaded the corresponding .fxp file that only took Qexl's EQ indications. This file is now online, in the "Fxp Corner" section of the forum (because it is not possible to save it in the "Other files" section). It is true that the pianoteq Steingraeber is a great match for Mozart's works.
I took the opportunity to propose "as is" an attempt to improve the Wooden character on the fxp Bosendorfer 200 on which I work, inspired in part by the equalization proposed by Qexl for Bluthner. I specify that Bosendorfer do not represent for me the absolute reference of what makes a very good grand piano, but it is only the best acoustic piano I have on hand to try to get closer to a real piano my pianoteq setup with headphones.
In addition, there are much better 200 acoustic bosen than the instrument that I use (for which I look forward to a new tuning in May and then a new capture note by note with a touch a little less flash -ball like)
To recover the spectrum profile of the instrument, I simply use the copy / paste function of the desired profile in pianoteq pro.
(simple text file with the succession of levels in db to increase or decrease note by note and for each part of the note). I build this file with a small program (simple prototype currently) that retrieves note by note the spectrum of each note, from spectrum files that can be recorded with Audacity (also csv text files). (for a given note - played at the ff level -, a spectrum file of the note played by Pianoteq, a spectrum file of the note played by the real instrument).
After matching the frequency ranges allocated for each N-rank part of a given score, the maximum level difference for a given partial between the virtual instrument and the actual instrument makes it possible to obtain the (theoretical) level in db to add or remove in the spectrum profile file to prepare before pasting it into Pianoteq pro. In reality, the difference obtained is very exaggerated and it is necessary to apply before a sort of function "rescale" to obtain a more realistic timbre, by applying a coefficient "rescale" more important when the difference exceeds a certain level in db.
The most tedious is for me to recover before hand from Pianoteq pro from the window "spectrum profile" the list of all the frequencies of the partials of a given note for a given string length. (I suppose, without being sure, that the stiffness of the strings is not the same between the model instrument (bluthner) and Bosendorfer, from which a preliminary phase of finding the right length of string to match as much as possible the partial frequencies of real and virtual instruments, before comparing the sound level). For the highest partials of bass notes pianoteq does not give a frequency (beyond 6khz for the lowest notes), hence the construction of a polynomial function in Excel to approach the supposed frequencies of the partials more high, up to 22khz).
Other elements on how to build the spectrum profile from notes are documented in the editable documentary area of the .fxp file.
For a simpler construction of an automated spectrum profile,
I invite you to contact the forum with Gilles who has realized another program much better integrated to automate in a simpler way to use a good part of these operations. The components of my own program may be readily available, but it is now composed of only partially automated prototype processing and written in the programming language of a database (pl / sql) which induced to date a relatively complicated installation.

NB: It is not essential to build the spectrum profile for all notes because Pianoteq pro extrapolates the information described for a given note to the nearest notes.
Moreover, the spectrum profile can not be perfectly automated, sometimes making it necessary to manually modify the levels of some partials on certain notes. (which was not done in the .fxp that I proposed)

Bruno

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

For me, it would be the Schimmel K132T upright. I think this Schimmel has a great sound worthy of being included.

By comparison the U4 upright that they do have sounds bright and not terribly interesting to my ears.

Matt

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

I had actually uploaded the corresponding .fxp file that only took Qexl's EQ indications. This file is now online, in the "Fxp Corner" section of the forum
Bruno

thank you Bruno and Qexl for this new Steingraeber fxp.  it's really awesome.  plus the Bosendorfer is excellent; i'm looking forward to more versions!

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Though my initial urging for a new piano from Pianoteq was solely a Baldwin SF-10 Artist Grand, I like to make an addition to include New York Steinway models B and D  —respectfully my second (2nd) and third (3rd) now forming a list! 

New York Steinways sound differently, in a comparison with Hamburg Steinways.

Pianoteq 8 Studio Bundle, Pearl malletSTATION EM1, Roland (DRUM SOUND MODULE TD-30, HandSonic 10, AX-1), Akai EWI USB, Yamaha DIGITAL PIANO P-95, M-Audio STUDIOPHILE BX5, Focusrite Saffire PRO 24 DSP.

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Hi Amen and Bruno - I just downloaded your recent fxps, 'Blue in Green' and the 'wooden' Steingraeber. I think I'm going to get a lot of enjoyment out of both of those settings. Thanks for uploading them!

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

I’m especially glad, dazric, you like mine.  Even I somehow find myself listening to Blue in Green, repeatedly.  Without my sounding pretentious, it seems the newly revoiced Steinway Model D, from which my Blue in Green 2019.fxp was made, allows me really to visualize the Blue in Green piano performer  —with the pianist seated at his instrument, the minute details of his varying hand placement, down to individual note fingering and his overall posture exacting on discretely discernible registers, newly audible via Pianoteq’s latest revoicing.  Evidently, via revoicing, you are now able to hear the total stereophonic glorious keybed including many of its portions distinguished, individually, as if coming from all points emanating their own sounds along the supposed wide keyboard!

Now, if I can just get the FXP Corner to accept my edit from ‘Blue In Green’ to ‘Blue in Green’ and the Pianoteq application to permit looped playback in its playlist and player, indeed you along with myself and others may enjoy quite enthusiastically the Blue in Green 2019.fxp repeatedly, uninterruptedly, without our having to go to another software.

Man, I just had to dump.

Importantly, if you are at all on some edge about whether or not my suggestion for the Baldwin SF-10 Artist Grand is a good one, as a potential sound investment for Pianoteq end users, let me direct your attention as well as others to National Public Radio Marian McPartland’s Piano Jazz.  In which that piano was the one chosen for some of the most historic recorded interviews ever conducted of modern pianists!

Please have an in-depth look and listen for yourself to Piano Jazz on National Public Radio available from this site: https://www.npr.org/series/15773266/mar...ano-jazz/.

Last edited by Amen Ptah Ra (26-03-2019 21:20)
Pianoteq 8 Studio Bundle, Pearl malletSTATION EM1, Roland (DRUM SOUND MODULE TD-30, HandSonic 10, AX-1), Akai EWI USB, Yamaha DIGITAL PIANO P-95, M-Audio STUDIOPHILE BX5, Focusrite Saffire PRO 24 DSP.

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Wow, what an incredible treasure trove that NPR Marian McPartland site is! I've bookmarked it and will return there many times. Although I'm not familiar with Baldwins at first hand (I live in the UK), I would certainly be interested in seeing one added to the Pianoteq collection.

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

I would like a piano like K2, which is not based on any existing model. In this way, it represents a true 4th Generation piano, not a copy of a piano that already exists. I believe a 4th generation piano does not have to be a replica of Steinway, Yamaha or any other brand, but it can be authentic by maintaining the fundamental physical sound generation characteristics that define it as a piano.

Respeito, Esforço e Sabedoria

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Professor Leandro Duarte wrote:

I would like a piano like K2, which is not based on any existing model. In this way, it represents a true 4th Generation piano, not a copy of a piano that already exists. I believe a 4th generation piano does not have to be a replica of Steinway, Yamaha or any other brand, but it can be authentic by maintaining the fundamental physical sound generation characteristics that define it as a piano.

It would be challenging to manage the thousands of parameters per note to create a physical model from scratch, rather than relying on Modartt's AI to 'profile' sample libraries of existing ones... Anyone up for the task?

(secretly hoping for a Pianoteq with all the parameters unlocked)

Last edited by lowendtheory (30-03-2019 06:33)

Re: Pianos you want Modartt to model?

Professor Leandro Duarte wrote:

I would like a piano like K2, which is not based on any existing model.

But what do you want this piano to sound like that's different from what can be done with the K2 (or another Pianoteq model) ?

Just asking for "different" doesn't say anything useful in designing such an instrument.  For that matter, how would this new model differ from some existing real piano that isn't currently in the Pianoteq range ?

Define the difference.

Also, as Modartt's goal with Pianoteq is to create a top-notch tool for reproducing how real piano models sound (something they've done remarkably well, IMO) producing an artificial one seems like a trip into no-mans-land for them.  There has always been the suspicion that the K2 is modeled on a real piano which the makers, for legal reasons, won't allow stated.  Modartt have never made this claim AFAIK, but it's certainly something widely believed in the community.

StephenG