So as long as I have a cardboard and plastic mock-up of a Bosendorfer for stage performances (cost to build: $1,600-$2,000), then that's the only advantage a multi-tens-of-thousands of dollars "real" piano or synthesizer has over a $1,000 PianoTeq setup, if I understand you correctly.

I can't believe there aren't more Yamaha / Roland fans posting replies saying "No! A Yamaha can do X that PianoTeq can't, and a Roland can do Y that PianoTeq can't..."

I don't think Yamaha has a keyboard with a modelling synth -- they have other instruments though (Trumpet?) using this kind of technology.

Roland's V-Piano does have a few options PTQ doesn't ... and vice versa.  But don't underestimating a single integrated box for somebody who earns a living playing music.  Removing extra elements of failure is a big deal.  Say you're on a gig and your laptop's hard drive dies -- damn, that means you gotta make sure you have 2 laptops you constantly rotate (to keep changes/tweaks sync'd up) and bring them both to every performance.  Then of course, you need backup cables, backup speakers and so on.  Every gig is a hurried panic of setting up equipment and seeing which pieces of equipment work ... assuming you didn't leave it behind in the previous gig.

As for real acoustic instruments, software replacements are still not exactly there yet.  Yeah, if you have the typical upright, PTQ is often better because acoustic pianos degrade pretty quickly.  The uprights at my kids' music school now play like crap due to the humid climate here -- out of tune, broken keys, etc. -- not fun to play on.  But if you're a classical artist accustomed to your performance grand piano, it sounds and feels like a world apart.

There are reasons for picking an expensive Roland V-Piano.

There's many numerous studies that show the visual aspect of music performance impacts audience just as much as the music aspect.  Just recently, a study was released showing people could identify "world class" orchestras just from images.  But after introducing sound into the videos, people's ability to identify the orchestras actually decreased.  Similar studies showed people could identify who won classical music competition if they saw footage+music -- but it was impossible for them to guess the winners from just listening to the music.

So say you are a professional music performer on stage ... and you have a small keyboard with wires & speakers & computers in a big rat's nest.  Maybe you're doing grunge rock or you're way in the back of a band, this fits in find.  But for many other situations, it will impact your ability to reach the audience.  While an acoustic grand probably would be best for projecting the image you want, not every location has one or can have one moved there.

So as long as I have a cardboard and plastic mock-up of a Bosendorfer for stage performances (cost to build: $1,600-$2,000), then that's the only advantage a multi-tens-of-thousands of dollars "real" piano or synthesizer has over a $1,000 PianoTeq setup, if I understand you correctly.

I can't believe there aren't more Yamaha / Roland fans posting replies saying "No! A Yamaha can do X that PianoTeq can't, and a Roland can do Y that PianoTeq can't..."

There's many numerous studies that show the visual aspect of music performance impacts audience just as much as the music aspect.  Just recently, a study was released showing people could identify "world class" orchestras just from images.  But after introducing sound into the videos, people's ability to identify the orchestras actually decreased.  Similar studies showed people could identify who won classical music competition if they saw footage+music -- but it was impossible for them to guess the winners from just listening to the music.

So say you are a professional music performer on stage ... and you have a small keyboard with wires & speakers & computers in a big rat's nest.  Maybe you're doing grunge rock or you're way in the back of a band, this fits in find.  But for many other situations, it will impact your ability to reach the audience.  While an acoustic grand probably would be best for projecting the image you want, not every location has one or can have one moved there.

For us mere mortals messing around at home, there are some technical aspects of the Roland V-Piano that are better.  The reviews say you can not only change the string length but the string material and the end results sound completely otherworldly.  Roland can also  better position the speakers to match where it comes out of an acoustic piano.  (You could do the same if you found a junk baby grand to rip out guts and put speakers/computers inside.)  For me, it's not worth $5000+ more but I'm just a hack learning to play.

Has PianoTeq destroyed any reason to buy a $8,000 Roland, or an $8,000 Yamaha?

uh.. for that kind of price, are you talking about a "real" acoustic piano, or a synthesizer??

And as for "destroyed any reason" ...depends what you want from such an acoustic piano and/or synth. For me yes, because (1) this system of Pianoteq + linux PC + midi controller functions very well and is very versatile, (2) i don't need an "all in one" or idiot-proof "easy to use" system, and (3) most importantly, to my ears at least Pianoteq sounds just as good, if not even better, than the best acoustic grand pianos i've heard even in person.

oh and (4) i don't have $8000

As long as whatever synthesizer or controller you have can output MIDI signals, then PianoTeq allows your keyboard to create sounds like the pianos that Pianoteq has as presets (super-realistic.)

So I must be missing something big, because why would anyone spend $8,000 on a Roland, when PianoTeq at $125 (combined with a $400 controller as a physical 88-key keyboard, and a $500 laptop) will not only make better, more realistic piano sound, but also allow you to use other virtual pianos as well?

Has PianoTeq destroyed any reason to buy a $8,000 Roland, or an $8,000 Yamaha?