We now have prices on physys, which now has a per note editor(optional, via PC), later versions of ptq, etc.

So, now that some folk have now actually SEEN,  PLAYED and even BOUGHT physis - also other developments in the market - what are people's current thoughts ?

Can we please move on to the actual topic?

Sometime I feel like was in the film The Body Snatchers...   the final scene when guy look to another and all people was in possession of aliens, making funny faces and noise.
Háaa háaa háaaaaaaa...
:-)

http://nukethefridge.com/wp-content/upl.../16539.jpg

Take a image with some degradee, and move you head horizontally about a inch or two. The degradee will change a bit.  This distance from right to left eye it's more than 2 inchs.

Also if you change the angle of your head vertically, the contrast will change.

I challenge any human being of Earth to show me a LCD monitor than I like or approve.

Come on... put a good CRT by side of a LCD, displaying the same imagem, and you will see LCD it's not good.

I will keep using CRT, and even fixing technical defects on it it happen, as long as I can. I refuse to use a LCD as monitor. I refuse this worldwide lie from media.

For me it's impossible to accept this technology.  How can I use such garbage, if for example I need to contrast grading a image, but don't know what image it's true, the image 2 inchs to side or two inchs from another, or 2 inchs upper or dow ?????

I must say that I have no idea what you're talking about. I have perfect eyesight, and I see absolutely NO differences between my right and left eye in contrast and brightness, when looking from the same point at my LCD.

Must be I'm mad, right?

Get used to it, as the world is not going back to CRTs.

+10000000

and by the way... What do you think about the erratic behavior of male beetles of New Guinea between May 12 and September 23 at 6:04 p.m. ???

Must be I'm mad, right?

Get used to it, as the world is not going back to CRTs.

I really hate LCD, even the modern ones, the LED iluminated one, all models.  I just can't accept that something called modern be worde than a old CRT.

I tried to use one once and I just could not stand in front of that thing. That thing make me sick.

The angle view problem? Well in 99.9% of cases you're looking STRAIGHT at the monitor, and not from the sides. Come on, man! That, and for quite a while higher tier LCDs have 175° viewing angle or something like that...

For me, an LCD is a portable companion which doesn't punish your spine when you want to move it. And I think you're overreacting to the whole thing just a little bit. Millions use them without any issues...

But what does this have to do with this topic?

I can't understand how so many people ignore the angle view problem, and the fact that if you move the head just a inch, the contrast and brightness look different a bit.  In other words, the distant between the right to left eye it's enough to change the contrast/brightness a bit. So what the right eye see it's not the same contrast/brighness the left eye see.

I'm alergic to LCD monitor, I just can't stand in front one, cause it make frustrated and made fool by marketing lie campagne.

People eat this thing just because most have a retangular screen and slim design.

One day I will put a LCD inside a CRT monitor body, just to people see how silly LCD is.

For me LCD it's like a digital piano with just 2 layers per note, no re-pedaling, no halph pedal, no pedal ressonance, no simpathetic ressonance... and crap speakers.

ORGANS AND HARPSICHORDS
Organs and harpsichords are, in my view very suitable for sampling. Because they dont have dynamic variance a layering of say 8 samples per note and another 4-8 of release samples make a suitable recording. In fact a sampled organ or harpsichord is what I prefer over modelling.

I love that pianoteq includes two harpsichords and I really hope for more historical instruments like more harpsichords or perhaps a clavichord ! But for the time being, I use a sampled harpsichord whenever I want to explore the art of the fugue.

PIANO
Talking about piano is a totally different story in the light of pianoteq. The sampled pianos a couple of years ago with say 4-8 layers of samples per note just didnt sound or feel right. So they added more samples, and more, and more. Until you would end up with a ridiculousy big sample library of just one single piano. And of course, even with a huge library, the sympathetic resonance was missing.

In my mind, moddart has done something extrordinary creating pianoteq. I keep and old Danemann upright from 1920 which I tune and maintain myself and love and cherish and soforth. But playing on my roland fp5 with pianoteq is something exquisit and extraordinary, I prefer it over any sample library and also over real pianos and grands, because Ive get to adjust the touch, and feel, and sound to my exact preference.

WIND INSTRUMENTS
Want to add something further to the debate about sampling vs modelling.
Talking about any windinstrument - I believe the best way to go is samples. Given that the tone is even more complex in a windinstrument then in a piano, to create a modelling of it would be strange. How to modell the small variances of airflow in a human way ?

Summing up my post:

Harpsichords and organs - sample them!

Piano - pianoteq !!!

Any windinstrument -  sample it !

But I also don't like the idea of a expensive digital  piano,  that will be outdate in few years, and can't be updated.

For me all digital things have a negative side and great headache potencial.  First of all, all TV adds show a lie, cause in a TV comercial everthing works fine, but when you buy a digital product, the things are slow or buging.

I still use a CRT monitor, cause I just hate all LCD monitors, a lie from industry pushed to consumers. I just don't understand how people accept a distorted image.