To tractor_music

In response to your request, here are some thoughts on pianoforall:

First of all, Robin Hall comes across as a teacher.(period)
There are no slick tours de force demos to inspire the student.
The videos only show the teacher's hands demonstrating the lessons on a digital keyboard – and the lessons are done slowly and deliberately to make sure the student gets it.

The course works best in a Windoze environment as this allows the video files (and the poorer quality audio files, which I ignore) to be invoked directly from the text.  In Linux you have to invoke them separately which is rather inconvenient.  As for MacOS … ?

A foundation is laid from a background of blues, ballads and jazz.   It isn't until book 8 that classical music is introduced, but the student so inclined could skip ahead once book 4 is completed (which is where I'm at).

The basic impression is that of a grade school introductory course that gives a basic understanding of where that sound comes from, and to get the beginner's hands doing something satisfying at the keyboard, and doing it intelligently enough to encourage further progess.

As for the technology employed; it is very, very basic – one video camera.  For comparison (and for fun) you might take a look at  7notemode.

And for 40 bucks, how can you go wrong?

Allan

Thanks for the link to 7notemode - I sent SEVERAL hours of my life following it (-:
Not wasted time.

In response to your request, here are some thoughts on pianoforall:

First of all, Robin Hall comes across as a teacher.(period)
There are no slick tours de force demos to inspire the student.
The videos only show the teacher's hands demonstrating the lessons on a digital keyboard – and the lessons are done slowly and deliberately to make sure the student gets it.

The course works best in a Windoze environment as this allows the video files (and the poorer quality audio files, which I ignore) to be invoked directly from the text.  In Linux you have to invoke them separately which is rather inconvenient.  As for MacOS … ?

A foundation is laid from a background of blues, ballads and jazz.   It isn't until book 8 that classical music is introduced, but the student so inclined could skip ahead once book 4 is completed (which is where I'm at).

The basic impression is that of a grade school introductory course that gives a basic understanding of where that sound comes from, and to get the beginner's hands doing something satisfying at the keyboard, and doing it intelligently enough to encourage further progess.

As for the technology employed; it is very, very basic – one video camera.  For comparison (and for fun) you might take a look at  7notemode.

And for 40 bucks, how can you go wrong?

Allan

I thought it was time for another amateur to weigh in and express his complete  sympathy with (and gratitude for) the original post that began this thread.  It was a relief to find that maybe it isn't “just me”.

Like what Paul tried to do with the D4, I also tried with the Bluethner  with similarly limited success.  There is still that persistent “nasal” quality in the sound, especially noticeable in the mid-range (see link below). 

I mainly use PT4 in conjunction with teaching software resident on the same laptop; it's more convenient.  For just playing, I still prefer my Roland HP302 sampled piano.  But here is where it gets a little interesting.

I am using the pianoforall piano lessons which include short videos in mov format.  He was demonstrating an Em79 chord which, as he remarked and I agreed, sounded really nice – on his piano.  But on the Bluethner, as well as on my Roland, not so nice.  I noticed he was using a Roland so I asked him what model it was.  It was an HP-236; a good ten years older than mine.  So what's going on – are we progressing backwards?

Then I found this  link  which related a piano player's lament at being unable to find an acceptable modern replacement for his beloved old (but ailing) Yamaha MP-100.  He is a retired engineer with quite a bit of experience in electronics and acoustics and discusses at some length his theory of the “nasal” piano problem.

He sees it as a marketing driven problem.  This would not surprise me as I have witnessed over recent years this same degradation in so many other products, with some of my favorite products completely driven from the market.

And so, to wrap this up, it would appear that the modelled virtual piano may be our only hope for the future.

PT5 anyone?

Allan

Thanks for the post, I have some agreement with the experience of the fellow from a previous era.
Yes, PTQ is good, very good - putting it aside for the moment.
The "rack rat" gear of the 80s and 90s was good, I agree that the manufacturers THEN were trying to emulate "real" (whatever THAT may mean) instrument sounds.  The MKS-20 is still pretty convincing - IMO, etc.
That was introduced when the great unwashed public was listening to walk-man and similar radios, the "richness of tone" took some getting used to.
I agree that a lot of the gear now is aimed at emulating "pop instrument" sounds, which are fine in their own right but aren't top flight grand pianos.
The product problem has also come a long way in two or three decades.
There is a much higher level of integration, which generally means that it is impractical to produce a range of sound generators from a basic design, i.e. it is no longer practical to produce econo, mid and high end tone generators from a single basic design.  When it all fits on one chip each design is another chip.  It used to be that the econo version had a few knobs and switches, the mid range had a couple of cut off filters, the high end version maybe had 7 band eq.

So, what to do ?, where to go ?
I suppose there will continue to be a (small) market for simulations that approach "concert instruments" and every so often a pop group will bring out a smash hit that uses a particular "physical" instrument, resulting in a short term revival.   
{Beetles, Eleanor Rigby,  MANY kids signed up for Cello lessons that year  (-: }

Ahh, before I forget - a tangent.  What are your thoughts/impressions of pianoforall ?
(In both a teaching context and a teach yourself context)
-------------------------------

Don Smith,
Thank you for taking time away from playing to experiment with the variable instrument we call pianoteq.
Of all the FXP files I have tried I can honestly say I have enjoyed yours the most, not just the settings but the combination with the pieces you play on them.  Thanks again - I am a BIG FAN !
Too much choice indeed, when the old community hall upright with a few broken strings was all there was it was plenty good enough.
---------------------------------------

How to make both happy ???

-If Modartt make exactly like the real thing, with some very few imperfection, some people will complain or even said it's a fault of technology.

-If they make it without imperfections of the original instrument, other people will say it's no accurate.

Like what Paul tried to do with the D4, I also tried with the Bluethner  with similarly limited success.  There is still that persistent “nasal” quality in the sound, especially noticeable in the mid-range (see link below). 

I mainly use PT4 in conjunction with teaching software resident on the same laptop; it's more convenient.  For just playing, I still prefer my Roland HP302 sampled piano.  But here is where it gets a little interesting.

I am using the pianoforall piano lessons which include short videos in mov format.  He was demonstrating an Em79 chord which, as he remarked and I agreed, sounded really nice – on his piano.  But on the Bluethner, as well as on my Roland, not so nice.  I noticed he was using a Roland so I asked him what model it was.  It was an HP-236; a good ten years older than mine.  So what's going on – are we progressing backwards?

Then I found this  link  which related a piano player's lament at being unable to find an acceptable modern replacement for his beloved old (but ailing) Yamaha MP-100.  He is a retired engineer with quite a bit of experience in electronics and acoustics and discusses at some length his theory of the “nasal” piano problem.

He sees it as a marketing driven problem.  This would not surprise me as I have witnessed over recent years this same degradation in so many other products, with some of my favorite products completely driven from the market.

And so, to wrap this up, it would appear that the modelled virtual piano may be our only hope for the future.

PT5 anyone?

Allan

About the "stationary" target... In fact, maybe the D4 is "too perfect" ! I happened to be lucky enough to record and sometimes play myself quite a lot of different Steinway's recently (mostly "D", sometimes "B" models). Sometimes even a couple of them, side by side, and THIS is interesting. You hear immediatly the differences between two theoretically same pianos. Some more ringing here, a longer sustain there, you name it. And irregularities everywhere. Some randomness in the way the piano reacts.

Here is one example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LW0uVAWwWxo
Another (model "B)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKQUm_qx-L4
Enjoy the performances by the way :-)

Maybe a suggestion for a new parameter in Pianoteq: "(im)perfection" !!!

I wonder if this is really a case of too many choices. If we could all worked in a piano showroom and have access to a Steinway, Bosendorfer, fazioli, etc. grand pianos, would we be able to keep our selves from being distracted by the choice. Or would we be satisfied with the sound of each piano? If Pianoteq was the only piano software out there, would we just accept it as a piano sound?

We automatically accept a real piano as sounding like a piano because we see that it IS A PIANO.   
The problem with software sounds is that we know it is not a real piano so we are biased immediately toward concluding that the sound is not a real piano sound.   And in the case of Pianoteq, this bias is even more pronounced because we know the sounds are synthetically produced instead of having been recorded from a real piano.   So, now any little deviation from what we perceive as a piano sound may turn us against that sound as being "piano like".

Pianoteq has a difficult task in front of them.   It is to their credit that they have come this far.    The good news is that piano sounds from the classic pianos are pretty stable so their target is stationary and they can keep inching toward it.

We can hope for the best.

I am afraid that having note-by-note editing possibilities may distract me from playing.

That, very definitely, can happen.    I experienced that when I first purchased Pianoteq PRO.   

Fortunately, [tongue in cheek] I eventually realized that I could not get the sound I wanted (call me picky) so I began to just accept the presets that were provided and just tweaked them slightly and blended them (softly) with my digital piano sound and that is where I am at with things now.   It allows me to change my sound periodically and that seems to satisfy me.   It is cheaper than going after another digital piano.

This sound business is so wrapped up in a multitude of factors (i.e.  computer, audio devices, amplifiers, speakers, monitors, room acoustics, etc ...) that it is very difficult to get the "perfect" sound so I now just accept the sound I have and try to spend most of my time playing the piano instead of judging the sound quality.

Main reason for this is that I find it a bit boring. The D4 reminds me of those photographs of models where the editors have gone overboard on photoshop to produce perfect but largely lifeless pictures. I tried to increase hammer hardness, etc. but I am still looking for a D4 sound that can excite me.

I wonder if this is really a case of too many choices. If we could all worked in a piano showroom and have access to a Steinway, Bosendorfer, fazioli, etc. grand pianos, would we be able to keep our selves from being distracted by the choice. Or would we be satisfied with the sound of each piano? If Pianoteq was the only piano software out there, would we just accept it as a piano sound?

Philippe, what about a new adjust for pianoteq ? 

Like hammer weight, or hammer impact, to allow key by key adjust of how powerfull some notes will behave along keyboard range.  This would allow to adjust a piano model to simulate a piano with strong bass, like Kawai for example.