I'm using a StudioLogic SL88 GT keyboard.
https://www.studiologic-music.com/products/slmk2/

USB C to 3.5mm Jack Audio Adapter, Dual DAC Chip CX31993 & MAX97220
https://www.amazon.ca/dp/B0GX54LLLV

Sony MDREX10LP IEMs
https://www.amazon.ca/dp/B004XXQI1U

iOS Audio Mixer and router.
https://kymatica.com/apps/aum

Headphone correction software
https://www.toneboosters.com/tb_morphit_v1.html

Professional Equalizer software
https://www.toneboosters.com/tb_equalizer_pro.html

This website is useful for comparisons.
https://crinacle.com/rankings/iems/
https://crinacle.com/rankings/headphones/

Wave wrote:

Well, i recently turned 71 and - unfortunately - age comes with a low pass filter, currently cutting off at about 8 kHz.

Over the years, improvements of Pianoteq sort of compensated for the cutoff frequency decrease :-)

Although I play occasionally with speakers (Kef 104/2), I prefer using headphones. I have an AKG 702 (Austrian made) and K550 (not sure about where it was made).

The 702 is preferred for Pianoteq, because it has the least "colouration". The 550 (closed back) has a bit of resonance around roughly 500 Hz. When comparing A/B, the 702 "definition" is better. Complex pieces with a lot of polyphony are a challenge for the 550. Don't get me wrong: the difference it minute and definitely does not disqualify the 550. But the 702 has the edge.

Apart from playing music, audio in general always was one of my interests. During the late 70's and early 80's, I sold stereo equipment and striving for "honest" reproduction of music was my primary goal.

Not a freak with gold connectors and $500 speaker cables, but understanding the fundamentals is essential.

A very important aspect is that even slight resonances have a distinct influence on the "character" of the overall sound. A simple test is to set a bump or valley with the equaliser and A/B test wit that. Closed back headphones have this fundamental "problem" and the question arises if resonances can be adequately compensated for with Pianoteq settings. Not only would one have to compensate for amplitude "errors" but every filter has a phase response too.

Then about mixing: I regard many "real world" recordings as being artificial and seem to aim at making it sound nice. Nothing wrong with that, but the core question is what the "reference" is.

Work is calling, but I will be glad to add some more thoughts.

But for now, enjoy and thanks all!

”Then about mixing: I regard many "real world" recordings as being artificial and seem to aim at making it sound nice. Nothing wrong with that, but the core question is what the "reference" is.”

Bravo, good question!

When making piano recordings, having the right reference materials and reference tracks is crucial for guiding your arrangement, performance and mixing stages. What should we use as a reference during the entire piano recording process….

It is probably like with the choice of headphones/speakers that we all have an “own” reference.
Sometimes the question here in the forum is “how do you get Pianoteq to sound like this?” And then a link is attached to a page with a pianist playing a certain grand piano - the reference. I too have listened to a certain song on YT to get the same sound with Pianoteq - my reference.
With the same headphones we hear different things - with the same reference we hear different things….
The chosen “reference” is professionally produced and mastered audio files that hopefully share a similar genre, vibe, instrumentation, or aesthetic to the project you are working on.
It acts as a benchmark for tonal balance, vocal-to-instrument balance, stereo width, and overall energy…

But, we hear these references different. I think we can’t say to another; use this one. So we choose our references ourselves according to what we ourselves want to hear or hear….

Best wishes,

Stig

Well, even how speakers and headphones are tuned differently now. Once, we voiced them with diffuse field as the reference. Now, more and more are voiced with the Harmon curve in mind. https://forum.hifiguides.com/t/graphs-f...om/9270/33

And if I were to continue with the ethos of HIFI reproduction, in my opinion the ultimate sound you should aim for, is the sounds of a piano from the player's or the audience's perspectives in various room settings. The job of your audio chain, therefore, should produce as little altering of that sound as possible. Therefore, do not feel shy about using things like https://autoeq.app/ to help achieve that sound.

Well, i recently turned 71 and - unfortunately - age comes with a low pass filter, currently cutting off at about 8 kHz.

Over the years, improvements of Pianoteq sort of compensated for the cutoff frequency decrease :-)

Although I play occasionally with speakers (Kef 104/2), I prefer using headphones. I have an AKG 702 (Austrian made) and K550 (not sure about where it was made).

The 702 is preferred for Pianoteq, because it has the least "colouration". The 550 (closed back) has a bit of resonance around roughly 500 Hz. When comparing A/B, the 702 "definition" is better. Complex pieces with a lot of polyphony are a challenge for the 550. Don't get me wrong: the difference it minute and definitely does not disqualify the 550. But the 702 has the edge.

Apart from playing music, audio in general always was one of my interests. During the late 70's and early 80's, I sold stereo equipment and striving for "honest" reproduction of music was my primary goal.

Not a freak with gold connectors and $500 speaker cables, but understanding the fundamentals is essential.

A very important aspect is that even slight resonances have a distinct influence on the "character" of the overall sound. A simple test is to set a bump or valley with the equaliser and A/B test wit that. Closed back headphones have this fundamental "problem" and the question arises if resonances can be adequately compensated for with Pianoteq settings. Not only would one have to compensate for amplitude "errors" but every filter has a phase response too.

Then about mixing: I regard many "real world" recordings as being artificial and seem to aim at making it sound nice. Nothing wrong with that, but the core question is what the "reference" is.

Work is calling, but I will be glad to add some more thoughts.

But for now, enjoy and thanks all!

”Then about mixing: I regard many "real world" recordings as being artificial and seem to aim at making it sound nice. Nothing wrong with that, but the core question is what the "reference" is.”

Bravo, good question!

When making piano recordings, having the right reference materials and reference tracks is crucial for guiding your arrangement, performance and mixing stages. What should we use as a reference during the entire piano recording process….

It is probably like with the choice of headphones/speakers that we all have an “own” reference.
Sometimes the question here in the forum is “how do you get Pianoteq to sound like this?” And then a link is attached to a page with a pianist playing a certain grand piano - the reference. I too have listened to a certain song on YT to get the same sound with Pianoteq - my reference.
With the same headphones we hear different things - with the same reference we hear different things….
The chosen “reference” is professionally produced and mastered audio files that hopefully share a similar genre, vibe, instrumentation, or aesthetic to the project you are working on.
It acts as a benchmark for tonal balance, vocal-to-instrument balance, stereo width, and overall energy…

But, we hear these references different. I think we can’t say to another; use this one. So we choose our references ourselves according to what we ourselves want to hear or hear….

Best wishes,

Stig

Over the years, improvements of Pianoteq sort of compensated for the cutoff frequency decrease :-)

Although I play occasionally with speakers (Kef 104/2), I prefer using headphones. I have an AKG 702 (Austrian made) and K550 (not sure about where it was made).

The 702 is preferred for Pianoteq, because it has the least "colouration". The 550 (closed back) has a bit of resonance around roughly 500 Hz. When comparing A/B, the 702 "definition" is better. Complex pieces with a lot of polyphony are a challenge for the 550. Don't get me wrong: the difference it minute and definitely does not disqualify the 550. But the 702 has the edge.

Apart from playing music, audio in general always was one of my interests. During the late 70's and early 80's, I sold stereo equipment and striving for "honest" reproduction of music was my primary goal.

Not a freak with gold connectors and $500 speaker cables, but understanding the fundamentals is essential.

A very important aspect is that even slight resonances have a distinct influence on the "character" of the overall sound. A simple test is to set a bump or valley with the equaliser and A/B test wit that. Closed back headphones have this fundamental "problem" and the question arises if resonances can be adequately compensated for with Pianoteq settings. Not only would one have to compensate for amplitude "errors" but every filter has a phase response too.

Then about mixing: I regard many "real world" recordings as being artificial and seem to aim at making it sound nice. Nothing wrong with that, but the core question is what the "reference" is.

Work is calling, but I will be glad to add some more thoughts.

But for now, enjoy and thanks all!

Pianoteqenthusiast wrote:

I’ve already said quite a bit in this post, but I want to add that it is the final link in the audio chain—the speakers or headphones—that determines how it sounds. If they don’t reproduce the sound accurately, it doesn’t matter how great our technology is.

Then the second problem:

And even with the best speakers or headphones, if the audio engineer (you or we) cannot do well enough; Balances volume, pans, and applies effects (like reverb) etc.  etc.  to create the final piece - well, if we not ruin the entire recording we can at least fail to make it sound the way it should.

And now I admit: I struggle with that myself every single time.
Here in my town, they usually offer courses in music mixing. Even though I’m nearing 80, it’s probably time to sign up for a course, together with all those young people…. 

Hope they don't say what is that old man doing here...  .

Best wishes,

Stig

Learning is the best part about life. Enjoy

Thank you Kengrayfield for your kindness.

Stig

I’ve already said quite a bit in this post, but I want to add that it is the final link in the audio chain—the speakers or headphones—that determines how it sounds. If they don’t reproduce the sound accurately, it doesn’t matter how great our technology is.

Then the second problem:

And even with the best speakers or headphones, if the audio engineer (you or we) cannot do well enough; Balances volume, pans, and applies effects (like reverb) etc.  etc.  to create the final piece - well, if we not ruin the entire recording we can at least fail to make it sound the way it should.

And now I admit: I struggle with that myself every single time.
Here in my town, they usually offer courses in music mixing. Even though I’m nearing 80, it’s probably time to sign up for a course, together with all those young people…. 

Hope they don't say what is that old man doing here...  .

Best wishes,

Stig

Learning is the best part about life. Enjoy

Then the second problem:

And even with the best speakers or headphones, if the audio engineer (you or we) cannot do well enough; Balances volume, pans, and applies effects (like reverb) etc.  etc.  to create the final piece - well, if we not ruin the entire recording we can at least fail to make it sound the way it should.

And now I admit: I struggle with that myself every single time.
Here in my town, they usually offer courses in music mixing. Even though I’m nearing 80, it’s probably time to sign up for a course, together with all those young people…. 

Hope they don't say what is that old man doing here...  .

Best wishes,

Stig

The old standard, AKG 240, pairs well with Pianoteq. But I often like the sound more through monitors, since they simply distribute the sound more like a piano does.

I have the big brother, AKG K340s. Some of the best sounding headphones that I will never part with. I heard the 240 have pretty good mid range as well.

Hi everyone,

I'm looking for a pair of headphones that will give me the most realistic experience of playing a grand piano with Pianoteq, rather than simply sounding the best for music listening.

I've been on a long journey tweaking Pianoteq in every possible way until I realized that my headphones might be the biggest bottleneck—not the piano itself.

I'm currently using the DT770 Pro 32Ω, and one thing I've always struggled with in Pianoteq is a slightly metallic/icy character. I also felt that the piano never quite came alive for me. After trying an open-back headphone (not even a particularly high-end one), I suddenly heard much better depth, keyboard imaging, and a much more natural, lively piano.

I'd especially like to hear from people who have experience with both the original ATH-R70x and the HD650 (or HD6XX).

My priorities are:
Rich, natural, colorful mids with body and weight.
Smooth upper frequencies without an icy or metallic character.
A natural, spacious presentation with realistic piano imaging (feeling the keyboard extend naturally from left to right).
Hearing microphone distance and depth.
Feeling like the piano is in front of me, in the room, rather than inside my head.
Has anyone here actually owned both the original ATH-R70x and the HD650 (or HD6XX) while playing Pianoteq or another high-end piano VST?

Of course, if you think another headphone would fit what I'm looking for even better, I'd really appreciate hearing your recommendation as well.

I'd really appreciate hearing about your experience. Thanks!

Note: Amplification isn't an issue, as I already have the iFi ZEN CAN Amp.

Another one worth auditioning is the Sony MDR-MV1 if you are a fan of a wide open sound with really stable positioning within the soundstage. The imaging is the best I have personally heard. Also pay as much, if not more attention to the source. There is no point imo buying great headphones and plugging them into your laptop.

Also: once you have decided the general form factor (open/closed/earbuds) and driver architecture (coil, planar, electrostatic), so long as you buy something reasonably well constructed, 99.9% of the difference is what house curve a given pair of headphones is matched to. Some like to keep it flat; some push the bass; some raise the highs to compensate for hearing changes with age. All of these can be overridden by doing your own EQ. You don't have to buy a product to make these choices - just get something competent and configure it to your liking. This is very practicable for single-purpose headphones - if you only listen to solo piano, you need far less versatility than the average headphone consumer, so you don't need to spend on a "master of all" to get the best of the best.

I am partial to open, planar headphones for solo piano - good frequency range, generally flat response, easy to drive. You may prefer closed if you find it better to hear less of your environment, or coils for a stronger drive. Stig's right - get something well constructed that sounds good to *you*, tweak towards your preference, don't overspend.

But with headphones the sound is in our head, and headphones gives left sound channel sound only to left ear, and right sound channel sound only to right ear(unlike standing beside a real piano where the sound come to both ears, maybe not at the same time, and with  that rooms acustics, not at same time to both ears from different directions a.s.o.).

Headphones also can sound different in different ear canals, earflaps, and the size and shape of the head have effect on how headphones reproduce the sound(also interesting, in Ptq binaural mode you can increase the the size of the head, and btw Binaural recording is intended for replay using headphones and will not translate properly over stereo speakers).
But, as with pianosounds, so it is with headphones too. There is no ”one” right, we are all different and hear different.  Different people like different headphones.
Had 7 different headphones over the years and now Grado Labs SR 125 x (hand made new York) open back hp.and after getting used to them, satisfied. Had not more money then. There is Grado SR325x with a bit ”more of everything” but I'm not changing anymore. Cost more too.

Having said all that, I’d say: listen with your own ears and choose the headphones that *you* think sound good. That’s what I did (not everyone chose Grado), and I’m happy with my choice.

Best wishes,

Stig

Thank you for replying and for all the recommendations.

I wanted to ask if anyone has heard or experienced anything about the Audio-Technica ATH-R70x not being a good match for Pianoteq.

I'm really interested in it specifically because of its more open presentation, since I'm really interested in it because I'm chasing a natural, realistic open-room feeling, (where microphone positioning can really shine). However, I definitely don't want to lose the rich midrange and smoothness that the Sennheisers are known for. (On the other hand, they're also often described as sounding more "in your head," which is exactly why I'm looking closely at the ATH-R70x).

If anyone has any more insight on how they compare in that regard (or if my impression that the Sennheisers sound more "in your head" isn't really true), I'd love to hear it!

There are many sennheisers. The pro models and the 560 (in my experience) are very open

I wanted to ask if anyone has heard or experienced anything about the Audio-Technica ATH-R70x not being a good match for Pianoteq.

I'm really interested in it specifically because of its more open presentation, since I'm really interested in it because I'm chasing a natural, realistic open-room feeling, (where microphone positioning can really shine). However, I definitely don't want to lose the rich midrange and smoothness that the Sennheisers are known for. (On the other hand, they're also often described as sounding more "in your head," which is exactly why I'm looking closely at the ATH-R70x).

If anyone has any more insight on how they compare in that regard (or if my impression that the Sennheisers sound more "in your head" isn't really true), I'd love to hear it!

I'm very happy with Sennheiser HD800 and HD600. You may prefer a Planar design, or Grado or Audio Technica for instance.