Pianoteq 6.5.0 (Page 2 of 2)

I would like to send a big compliment to Pianoteq 6.5.0. Especially Steinway D has become really great. Clear, open, wood and metal well balanced. The subterranean synthetic sound is largely gone. I congratulate and thank the team.

You want immersive?  Have some of this immersive right here:

Pianoteq v6.5.0 Audio Example

It's from one of Phil Best's called The Places We Knew taken from the examples now which highlight Pianoteq v6.5.0 changes on its Steinway D webpage.

I'll er Phil will give  —you immersed!

Honestly, I see no comparison, Fleer!

I will say, however, I've very much enjoyed Mr. Piet De Ridder's Kites:

https://www.pianoteq.com/audio//bechste...Ridder.mp3

It just seems to remind me of the days I spent as a youth on my great-granddad's farm, when it was outside the city of Perris in Riverside County, California.  Visually it was hardly any different from that "farm scene" of the Kansas home that was depicted still earth bound within the movie The Wizard of Oz.

My cousin from San Diego, California would come and see if he could beat me with marksmanship with our rifles by our sides.  Let me tell you, our initial meeting was surreal, with military like precision  —or something typical of a western shootout.

You see; my great-granddad was from another era!

Let me say, thank you, to Mr. Piet De Ridder.  I'm really enjoying your music.

And let me just clarify, I am a non-violent vegetarian.

I am not totally sure because I don't have the previous version to compare side by side, but I think the Grotrian has been greatly improved by the new attack setting with this new 6.5 version.
Any thought about other users?
It was my less played model and now I find it really superb.

Yes, I have always used the Steinway B, but now the Grotrian Concert Royal is sounding great.

You know as well as I, since cutomized can mean anything from a single incremental tweak to broad sweeping changes to a whole bunch of parameters, people at MODARTT are maybe unabashedly entranced by the idea of some end users attempting to figure out many parameter changes for themselves!

Anyway I’m still visualizing the real scarecrow that was on the farm of my childhood.  I probably had to have been a wide eyed kid nearly enchanted by it.

Because of Piet De Ridder’s demo entry I feel I am very much reminded of it  —how mysterious it appeared to me.

Possibly, Piet was referencing from his own childhood as well  —via an apparent interplay from a familiar theme recognized by the baby boomers who quietly sat and watched Captain Kangaroo early mornings: https://youtu.be/tSW-LJJHH3U.

You know, Jake, the statement “A child exists in everyone.” is indeed true.

+1
Those are the absolute beauties in my book.
Edit: and the new Bechstein!

thank you Fleer.
so many Steins, so little.............lol
I think I'll try putting all 3 together in Reaper, and
have a Stein-fest.
yeah, thats the ticket.
a Stein-festivus for the rest of us.
I think Jerry "Stein"-feld may get a kick out of it.
I might even throw in my Chocolate Audio Steinbach,
like for dessert, perhaps?   

as for 6.5.0, I still have a few more instruments to check out.
but, yeah, I also love the new Bechstein.

In my experience Pianoteq may be the best behaved software I have encountered over many decades Lorenzo - your issue likely resides with something in your kit.

Search function can find many Pianoteq threads about plugin issues, try that option first.

But, if none of those surface info to help with your situation (optimistic they will), I'd suggest uninstall and reinstall - and next to contact Pianoteq support with some detail.  Detail is key and they are extremely helpful. If you have a rare hardware/software issue, it might be a bug and help the next update etc.

If you'd like the forum community to help trouble-shoot, maybe begin a new thread.

Anybody else find the windows recall feature a welcomed relief?

And, the main window does have a new look!

Now Pianoteq will give you immersed!

Useful indeed. And version 6.5.1 corrects the bug with restoring the Note Edit window in 6.5.0. Also works as toggle to hide windows...

I don't see any new look in the main window though. What is it?

One small bug: In the french version the text for the keyboard save and restore shortcut is in english while everything else is in french.

ADDED: To be consistent, this facility should also be present in the Window top menu of the standalone version.

Oh right! I didn't notice and didn't keep previous versions...

This release so far has really made me not want to purchase a real acoustic 7' 4" anymore, they really nailed the low end grunt of the concert pianos and sound way more "Full" to my ears. I'm not messing around with voicing the Piano I was going to buy!

Hmmmm, Beto-music...

Very metallic midrange, with buzzy-bass, but a sweet upper end that is better than the lower two-thirds of the keyboard, which is almost harpsichord-like.  And even when switched from Stereophonic to a player-microphone arrangement, the whole instrument still sounds as if it is playing out of a barrel (despite my turning off the reverb).

I have played it once in a while, but never loved it, and didn't keep a pre-6.5 version going so I can't make a direct comparison. 

The 1899 Bechstein, on the other hand, is quite lovely from top to bottom, especially in the Under Lid, which may be the closest stock preset to a Player preset.  It sounds a bit 'plastic/synthetic', though, in the midrange, but that's mainly in comparison to the C. Bechstein D.G.  The latter, in my opinion, is the best current instrument, and is the most realistic in the Player mode.  With appropriate speaker volume settings and key velocities, it's absolutely the closest thing to a real acoustic in its audio properties.  So nice!

Well, it was left alone, not really abandoned, because it was not possible to do a good update. SOmething about how the real model (old grand Bechstein tunned to be a rock piano) wasn't or could not be very well very analyzed as the other models for the creation of the digital version. This, according Modartt, if I remamber well, made difficult or not possible to update the add-on, so they left it alone and excluded from the piano list  when the updated versions of other piano models sounded much more natural than such Bechstein.

I didn't kept 6.4 version, and now can't compare the Bechstein 1896 in 6.4 to 6.5.
I wonder if there is some difference...

Can someone, with 6.4 and 6.5 versions installed, make a test for Bechstein 1896?

Or download the earlier version:
https://www.pianoteq.com/download?file=...p_v641.dmg

Just copy the download link, and change 651 into 641 (or what other version you want to have).
At least in Linux, you can have multiple instances of Pianoteq installed.

Just acquired (d/l or u/l?) this latest 6.51.  All seem to have improved.  Some of the "home" settings seem exquisite, really do.  But Bluthner seems as always, the best of the best.  So playable. I'm totally stumped for a second choice.  I'll never get any work done at this rate . . .

Not sure I understand this FULLY !

It seems to imply that pianoteq (at least in some cases) doesn't model physical pianos, but instead imitates sampled sound libraries.

http://forum.pianoworld.com/ubbthreads....844/2.html

Scroll down to an entry by member C

"Hm, I just noticed in another thread the “Bechstein Digital Grand” sample based VST made by Bechstein themselves. I thought that particular DG reference was a fancy name invented by Pianoteq but a second read of their description actually confirms they modeled their sound after the samples of an actual piano and not after an actual piano. Which actually confirms once again a previous statement some of us have made: Pianoteq synthesizes the sound in a way that recreates a pre-recorded sound. Whether they can also model the physical object which we call “piano” rather than approaching recorded waves is a matter of dispute. Or maybe they support both? Even simultaneously? But since Bechstein DG is to my ears the least synthetic Pianoteq model so far (although I can still detect some hints of it), I’m wondering if it’s the way Pianoteq should utilize most in future."

I "bought into" pianoteq in the belief that it was 100% "modeled",
i.e. mathematically derived from the physics of how stretched strings vibrate and pass their vibrations on to wood, how the sound board wood selectively filters some frequencies, as does the cabinet, etc.
I later discovered that some of the incidental noises are basically samples, which is probably OK although the builders of wooden pianos would probably eliminate those entirely if only they could find "perfect" sound deadening felt.

So I'm wondering how much "better" modeling can be than sampling - - if it is a model of a sample library ?!?
Does it "improve on" the sample library ?, or are there losses ?

For all sorts of practical reasons, yes a recording (of some kind) would have to be used (at some point), at least to calibrate the model.

One of the objections to sample libraries has been that they include all the artifacts and limitations of the recording/reproduction process.
I guess those are constants that both camps are simply stuck with...

OK, I can live with that<grin>  - PTQ still has smaller footprint and other advantages.

As you say, samples are indeed needed to calibrate the model, they serve as reference. But of course recording artifacts such as background noise or embedded reverberation don't go through to Pianoteq.

,

The only "everything" bundle I know of is the Pro Studio - the list price of that is approx twice the price of Pro (which already includes 4 instrument packs).

Historically ...There have been Black Friday sales - in some years an early summer sale (close to now).
As they say in investing past performance is not necessarily and indicator of future performance (something like that).
On the other hand, once a company starts a tradition of discounts at particular times of year their customers tend to wait for it - so there is pent up demand just WAITING and watching the calendar.

I think some decent discount for "everything I don't already have" would be nice.

I also notice some sort of latency? is this by design?