<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<title type="html"><![CDATA[Modartt user forum - Interesting piano comparisons]]></title>
	<link rel="self" href="https://forum.modartt.com/extern.php?action=feed&amp;tid=1030&amp;type=atom"/>
	<updated>2010-01-07T20:21:58Z</updated>
	<generator>PunBB</generator>
	<id>https://forum.modartt.com/viewtopic.php?id=1030</id>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Interesting piano comparisons]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://forum.modartt.com/viewtopic.php?pid=8510#p8510"/>
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>I love the sound of Pianoteq. I think it sounds very similar to real acoustic piano. If played at a comparative volume to that of an acoustic piano, I find it quite convincing. I feel It could benefit from more power in the engine that drives the general programme. The pro version is the one to go for.</p><p>I like the sound of what I hear with the sampled sets too, but I just don&#039;t have the capacity to load something like Ivory or Quantum Leap pianos on my computer, even if I deleted all my other software (and operating system <i class="far fa-grin-tears smiley"></i>).</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[DonSmith]]></name>
				<uri>https://forum.modartt.com/profile.php?id=736</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2010-01-07T20:21:58Z</updated>
			<id>https://forum.modartt.com/viewtopic.php?pid=8510#p8510</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Interesting piano comparisons]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://forum.modartt.com/viewtopic.php?pid=8487#p8487"/>
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>I confess to being a Garritan player...&nbsp; (hence my shameless plug of it in the &#039;Zero Latency&#039; thread).&nbsp; But I agree completely with the comments here.&nbsp; The sound of the Garritan combined with the customization and playability of Pianoteq would be such a milestone in virtual pianos!</p><p>I think another 10 velocity layers per note (bringing the total to around 20) played through the DSP engine of Pianoteq (lid position, mic/binaural placement, velocity control, resonance adjustments) would result in quite an amazing product.</p><p>Today&#039;s PCs can certainly deliver the performance requirements for this.</p><p>Curt</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[curt]]></name>
				<uri>https://forum.modartt.com/profile.php?id=835</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2010-01-07T11:41:57Z</updated>
			<id>https://forum.modartt.com/viewtopic.php?pid=8487#p8487</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Interesting piano comparisons]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://forum.modartt.com/viewtopic.php?pid=8486#p8486"/>
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>I&#039;m feeling optimistic that Pianoteq will soon be so close so as not to matter. I really don&#039;t think it&#039;s got that far to go.&nbsp; I already think it&#039;s close enough for the electric pianos.&nbsp; (I know not everyone agrees with me on this)</p><p>I like the idea of Pianoteq being &quot;pure&quot; - not contaminated with samples. <i class="far fa-smile smiley"></i> I know all that matters is the end result, but I&#039;d still prefer Pianoteq to be purely modelled if that is at all possible.&nbsp; (I certainly have nothing against sampled pianos whatsoever, though)</p><p>Greg.</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[skip]]></name>
				<uri>https://forum.modartt.com/profile.php?id=353</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2010-01-07T11:13:45Z</updated>
			<id>https://forum.modartt.com/viewtopic.php?pid=8486#p8486</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Interesting piano comparisons]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://forum.modartt.com/viewtopic.php?pid=8483#p8483"/>
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>Garritan&#039;s piano has a great sound indeed. Pianoteq has a great product I really like but indeed...some of the authenticity of a real piano is a bit missing but playability is at toplevel. So to get the feel of authenticity you&#039;ll need a sample at this moment but for playability virtual modelling. I personally think a hybrid situation will do the job (the only way?) just like the new-coming Yamaha CP1, CP5.<br />Maybe Pianoteq and Garritan should join efforts to build the ultimate virtual piano killerapp ;-)</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[hvaartsen]]></name>
				<uri>https://forum.modartt.com/profile.php?id=1050</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2010-01-07T08:32:04Z</updated>
			<id>https://forum.modartt.com/viewtopic.php?pid=8483#p8483</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Interesting piano comparisons]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://forum.modartt.com/viewtopic.php?pid=8469#p8469"/>
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>Just been over to Garritan! There&#039;s something in the Steinway recordings that Pianoteq definately lacks! I love Pianoteq, don&#039;t get me wrong, but there&#039;s a certain something that you get with actual recordings that just isn&#039;t there in any of the Pianoteq instruments. Call it &#039;authenticity&#039; if you will. How can Modartt capture that &#039;realness?&#039; Is it truly possible to capture using modelling? I&#039;m sure it is, but we&#039;re not there yet!</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[sigasa]]></name>
				<uri>https://forum.modartt.com/profile.php?id=399</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2010-01-07T00:19:06Z</updated>
			<id>https://forum.modartt.com/viewtopic.php?pid=8469#p8469</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Interesting piano comparisons]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://forum.modartt.com/viewtopic.php?pid=8465#p8465"/>
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<div class="quotebox"><cite>jcfelice88keys wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Hello Don and Glenn,</p><p>This post is not intended to slam a competitor&#039;s library; rather, it describes the events that actually happened.&nbsp; Two years ago, I purchased the BDMO library, solely based upon what I heard in the provault.com audio snippets specifically referenced in the opening post of this thread.</p><p>My payment of approximately $300USD for the BDMO (Bluethner Digital Model One) library seemed well spent .... for only about two months.&nbsp; From what I recall, essentially one piano was sampled, and then its tonal characteristics were modified by superimposing (convolving perhaps?) the EQs of famous commercial piano recordings onto the original Bluethner samples.</p><p>My decision to purchase this library was based on the belief this piano could sound like Glenn Gould&#039;s 1955 Goldberg Variations recording, a famous 1959 Chopin recording by Arthur Rubenstein, Paul McCartney&#039;s piano sound in the Abbey Road Studios, famous jazz recordings, etc, etc.</p><p>While there were no glaring problems with the library, I didn&#039;t feel a sense of exhilaration, either.&nbsp; In contrast, I seem to be finding pianistically musical qualities that I like -- almost every time I fire up Pianoteq.</p><p>Based upon firsthand playing experience with the BDMO library, Glenn&#039;s above comment #1 -- &quot;being sonically similar does not necessarily lead to being playable in real time&quot; -- is especially appropriate in this context of the competitor&#039;s library.&nbsp; &nbsp;My apologies to provault.com, in case I offended any one there.</p><p>Cheers,</p><p>Joe</p></blockquote></div><p>Joe, i own just about all the sample programs except for EWQL - sorry, but i don&#039;t own a mainframe - and the BDMO was the one i could never get to sound like i thought it should.&nbsp; it was a shame.&nbsp; maybe that&#039;s me being a crappy technical guy, but i always thought i was inside a can while playing.&nbsp; &nbsp;Although i have sworn off sample programs (the grand 3 was the last straw), i like the garritan, and i think jeff over there works very hard at making it better.&nbsp; he has the same &quot;discipline&quot; the pianoteq guys have- keep things moving forward, look at this as a subscription business- not an end product in itself... he&#039;s already on 1.04 and working on 1.05.&nbsp; if anybody ever gets a sampled piano &quot;right&quot;- i think it will be them... but it is also why i would buy modartt if it were a public company- modelling technology seems so much more open-ended than sampling.</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[boehnbr]]></name>
				<uri>https://forum.modartt.com/profile.php?id=1014</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2010-01-06T22:07:57Z</updated>
			<id>https://forum.modartt.com/viewtopic.php?pid=8465#p8465</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Interesting piano comparisons]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://forum.modartt.com/viewtopic.php?pid=8457#p8457"/>
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>One reason I have not purchased BDMO is in fact due to what I perceived as a lack of timbral range in some of the impulse-response modified demo recordings. I also saw a comment from a reviewer that he often preferred the raw sound to the modified sounds.&nbsp; I concluded that this functionality seemed to be a bit gimicky, and given the price,&nbsp; it didn&#039;t seem appropriate for me.&nbsp; I do think some of the demo recordings are excellent though. </p><p>Another interesting reason I chose not to buy it is that after listening to REAL recordings of the REAL instrument, I wasn&#039;t quite sure that I loved the Bluthner sound. </p><p>Greg.</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[skip]]></name>
				<uri>https://forum.modartt.com/profile.php?id=353</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2010-01-06T19:07:58Z</updated>
			<id>https://forum.modartt.com/viewtopic.php?pid=8457#p8457</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Interesting piano comparisons]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://forum.modartt.com/viewtopic.php?pid=8452#p8452"/>
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>Hello Don and Glenn,</p><p>This post is not intended to slam a competitor&#039;s library; rather, it describes the events that actually happened.&nbsp; Two years ago, I purchased the BDMO library, solely based upon what I heard in the provault.com audio snippets specifically referenced in the opening post of this thread.</p><p>My payment of approximately $300USD for the BDMO (Bluethner Digital Model One) library seemed well spent .... for only about two months.&nbsp; From what I recall, essentially one piano was sampled, and then its tonal characteristics were modified by superimposing (convolving perhaps?) the EQs of famous commercial piano recordings onto the original Bluethner samples.</p><p>My decision to purchase this library was based on the belief this piano could sound like Glenn Gould&#039;s 1955 Goldberg Variations recording, a famous 1959 Chopin recording by Arthur Rubenstein, Paul McCartney&#039;s piano sound in the Abbey Road Studios, famous jazz recordings, etc, etc.</p><p>While there were no glaring problems with the library, I didn&#039;t feel a sense of exhilaration, either.&nbsp; In contrast, I seem to be finding pianistically musical qualities that I like -- almost every time I fire up Pianoteq.</p><p>Based upon firsthand playing experience with the BDMO library, Glenn&#039;s above comment #1 -- &quot;being sonically similar does not necessarily lead to being playable in real time&quot; -- is especially appropriate in this context of the competitor&#039;s library.&nbsp; &nbsp;My apologies to provault.com, in case I offended any one there.</p><p>Cheers,</p><p>Joe</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[jcfelice88keys]]></name>
				<uri>https://forum.modartt.com/profile.php?id=734</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2010-01-06T18:34:37Z</updated>
			<id>https://forum.modartt.com/viewtopic.php?pid=8452#p8452</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Interesting piano comparisons]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://forum.modartt.com/viewtopic.php?pid=8447#p8447"/>
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>I&#039;ve seen it before, but never carefully read the text:</p><p>&quot;These demos were meant to illustrate how close sonically a sampled piano library approaches the sonic qualities of real world acoustic recordings&quot;.</p><p>1)&nbsp; being sonically similar does not necessarily lead to being playable in real time.</p><p>2)&nbsp; the sonic qualities of the original recordings aren&#039;t very good; some of them aren&#039;t at all flattering to the pianist.</p><p>I&#039;ve had the files on my HDD several times and listened to them all - samples often <em>sound good</em> but don&#039;t often play well.</p><p>Glenn</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[Glenn NK]]></name>
				<uri>https://forum.modartt.com/profile.php?id=750</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2010-01-06T17:22:38Z</updated>
			<id>https://forum.modartt.com/viewtopic.php?pid=8447#p8447</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Interesting piano comparisons]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://forum.modartt.com/viewtopic.php?pid=8427#p8427"/>
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>I found these piano comparisons interesting:<br /><a href="http://www.proaudiovault.com/bdmo-comparison.htm">http://www.proaudiovault.com/bdmo-comparison.htm</a></p><p>I&#039;m not sure if this featured in the forum before.</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[DonSmith]]></name>
				<uri>https://forum.modartt.com/profile.php?id=736</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2010-01-06T10:07:06Z</updated>
			<id>https://forum.modartt.com/viewtopic.php?pid=8427#p8427</id>
		</entry>
</feed>
