Modartt user forum - Four areas for possible improvement

Re: Four areas for possible improvement

2015-03-13T19:54:10Z

Ah, I see, did not understand you right.

Re: Four areas for possible improvement

2015-03-13T18:20:44Z

I was being a bit more literal..

I refer about record some performances, using pianoteq 5 and the best colaborator pianists, into a LP, a vynil record. A limited edition.

Just a idea, cause the actual prices for LP production are very high today.

AKM wrote:

Beto-Music wrote:

By the way, what about create a Pianoteq LP collection?
It's probable that listening to a LP most people would not realise it was made by digital modelled emulation of a real piano
Sure it would also be nice to have a built in emulation of vintage eq and compression devices, MIDI edit, a video capture ability for realtime recording and YouTube live streaming, etc...
You can make your recording sound retro using a large variety of top grade third party software, and it is a huge separate topic how to make your virtual piano to sound bomb in terms of what you actually looking for.
I prefer Modartt team to focus on their main area - making a decent virtual piano model. They already have the effects section with just some essential fx to make it sound great right out of the box - thats enough.
I may suggest you to go to Waves website to check their analog devices emulation plugins, also the Speakerphone is not worth mentioning.

Re: Four areas for possible improvement

2015-03-12T18:50:45Z

Beto-Music wrote:

By the way, what about create a Pianoteq LP collection?
It's probable that listening to a LP most people would not realise it was made by digital modelled emulation of a real piano

Sure it would also be nice to have a built in emulation of vintage eq and compression devices, MIDI edit, a video capture ability for realtime recording and YouTube live streaming, etc...

You can make your recording sound retro using a large variety of top grade third party software, and it is a huge separate topic how to make your virtual piano to sound bomb in terms of what you actually looking for.

I prefer Modartt team to focus on their main area - making a decent virtual piano model. They already have the effects section with just some essential fx to make it sound great right out of the box - thats enough.

I may suggest you to go to Waves website to check their analog devices emulation plugins, also the Speakerphone is worth mentioning.

Re: Four areas for possible improvement

2015-03-12T13:41:16Z

Can you filter off the idiots, the cars, the screems and the dogs ?
(joking around...)

Here a nice example of sound restoration: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ab5x-5qkM0o

But I bet some people want such kiss and cracks to add in digital recordings.

By the way, what about create a Pianoteq LP collection?
It's probable that listening to a LP most people would not realise it was made by digital modelled emulation of a real piano

EvilDragon wrote:

But it has all that white noise coming from the outside, cars, idiots screaming at each other, dogs barking, etc... I'd take hiss and tape saturation any time of the day or night!

Re: Four areas for possible improvement

2015-03-12T13:35:14Z

Okie as requested.
https://soundcloud.com/james-lei-1/bose...cert-grand

Is this a virtual instrument or live recording or hybrid recording? Only that we can't play that level of dB on our DAW without filtering or we might go deaf since piano was originally invented to play in the open.

Except one thing, I believe none of the MIDI keyboards are capable of that level of playing, so my best bet is on VAX MIDI keyboard with Hi-Res velocity which Pianoteq supported.

Re: Four areas for possible improvement

2015-03-11T17:15:26Z

But it has all that white noise coming from the outside, cars, idiots screaming at each other, dogs barking, etc... I'd take hiss and tape saturation any time of the day or night!

Re: Four areas for possible improvement

2015-03-11T15:47:42Z

The real world do not have the hiss and distortions of vinyl and tape.

Re: Four areas for possible improvement

2015-03-11T15:14:20Z

I like to utilize u-he Satin after Pianoteq to add tape saturation and artifacts. Better than vinyl as far as I'm concerned.

Re: Four areas for possible improvement

2015-03-11T14:07:48Z

In actual technology, Vinyl was an innovative technology and someone did recorded Bosendorfer recording which is unbelievable close to player seat and all that bass delivers wonderful vibration to my headphone.

Re: Four areas for possible improvement

2015-03-11T13:59:31Z

All about processing power or problem with micing is incorrect. The missing link is we are hearing digital sample and algorithm which is lack of the dynamic ranges we usually heard and feel from real piano strings. Someone need to research on adding vinyl or analog into pianoteq, only then we can get it right sounds.

Piano in Blues is one example and without the analog effect it's way too thin.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x93hUqPpW4A

V2 is indeed an improvement
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bd1-wRRQpvo

Re: Four areas for possible improvement

2015-03-11T13:53:59Z

The Moore's Law unfortunately is no longer a reality, and don't even close to it.
Think about how many yeas the PC market it's stuck in i7 processor.

Maybe someone can post a graphic of the processors evolution in the last 7 or 8 years, but I presume the evoution in processing power was a misery compared to "the good old days".

I believe the actual recording technique, used to create a modeled piano for pianoteq, uses more than two channels, and mics in very diferente positions (close and distant from piano).

Re: Four areas for possible improvement

2015-03-11T05:04:08Z

My subjective impression is that what may be perceived as a thin sound comes from a default mic position that is a little more distant than I would like. In other words, the recordings used as a basis for modelling the partial structure were created with mics that were several feet from the instrument, to create a more "classical" perspective. which is very different from the sound that we hear sitting at a piano or listening to many recordings. I worry that, when we move the Pianoteq mics closer, the programming assumes that the relative amplitude of partials and the mechanical noises such as the keybed thump, remain the same, but when sitting at a piano, or when mics are moved closer on a real piano, we hear something else entirely, partly because we then hear the subtleties of the air vibrations bouncing around in the case.

I do understand that relatively distant mics help, when modelling, to create a clear rendering of the partial structure. My vote would be to use closer recordings, and then to model from there. The amplitude of near partials or the bandwidth of partials might then be greater--there would be more of a mess--so programming the response to velocity might be more difficult. But having the closer sound for soft notes, and for the attack in general, might more than compensate for problems with harder attacks. I can imagine a methodology that starts with close recordings, but limits the amplitude of some partials as velocity increases, assuming that the amplitude is not linear for all partials and all transient and mechanical noises. Could close. medium, and distant recordings be made with varying velocities, and then the programming adjusted to meet the derived data? (Theory is clean; reality is messy?)

Re: Four areas for possible improvement

2015-03-11T04:18:23Z

What an interesting topic and insightful observations! Out of the 4 areas for possible improvement I identify with #3 the most. Nowadays (since we sold out acoustic piano) I use Pianoteq much more than an acoustic piano. While it is great, when I play an acoustic piano, even a low quality one, there is a richness, almost an enveloping richness, when playing multiple notes together that is not totally replicated with Pianoteq as of yet. While I would not describe it as dull, to me it may be described as "too clean" or a bit "clinical".

Could it be due to the limitation of processing power? I certainly hope this is the case because it points to an ultimate resolution with the constantly increasing processing power available.

Another possibility could be the limitation of the speakers / monitors / sound system, that somehow a pair of speakers emitting sound from two points is inadequate in reproducing the vibration of many long individual steel strings, each vibrating differently and interacting with a large sound board at a different location within the piano. In the audiophile world they frequently talk about the speakers' ability to maintain its clarity and transparency in complex musical passages; they also talk about the speakers' ability to sound "big" or life scale. If this is a contributing factor the solution may well be outside the scope of Pianoteq's modelling algorithm.

Re: Four areas for possible improvement

2015-03-10T17:03:35Z

Ah yes, this is basically what I thought might be going on. I've noticed that while playing, the CPU usage as reported by Pianoteq (windows always reports much lower CPU usage, not sure why that is) quickly maxes out at around 30 some percent. Even when I play far more sustained notes on top of this, the CPU level doesn't really go up much. So yes, some sort of CPU intense check box or slider might be nice.

Re: Four areas for possible improvement

2015-03-10T13:51:08Z

The thinnes was reduced a lot, compared to earlier versions.

Higher strikes (FFF) with sustein pedal on, creates a lot of extra interaction, elaborated and longer reactions, and that would consumes a lot of extra CPU power, and so it's probable that the algorithm computation for these elements needs to be resumed even more.

I once suggested to create a special version of pianoteq, for people with i7 processors only. Or even a option to render the sound (mp3 exchange for exemple) with more elaborated computation, when it's not using in real time.