I've recently been experimenting through my Kawai CA97 internal speakers and posted some results here:

https://forum.modartt.com/viewtopic.php?id=8812

In a nutshell, I've uploaded 3 different FPX that started to sound "ok" to my ears while it's still not comparable to the way PTQ sounds through actual studio monitors.

Yet I found it somewhat more pleasent (authentic?) the way it sounds throught the internal speakers rather than from the studio monitors..

Sorry for being redundant in the post, but I thought it was helpful to open a new thread exclusively for CA97 users (the link above)..

Any feedback or suggestions are appreaciated.

Warm regards,
David

Hi.

I’m using Pianteq Stage with my Kawai CA97 and it’s a great experience. The Kawai reproduces the sound of the piano brilliantly with it’s mix of speakers and soundboard. I’m most interested in adjusting the sound in Pianotieq to make the experience of playing as realistic as possible, not the creation of a superb recorded sound.

To that end I’m looking at sounds that have no reverb (there’s my room for that), and as much sound of the piano in front of me as possible. That means key noise, mechanical noise, vibrations and so on, pedal squeak etc. I want to most realistic experience of sitting at a stool in front of a real, mechanical piano.

Can anyone give me any advice how to emphasise that? Perhaps it’s the case that those adjustments don’t exist in the version I have. I have found the Steinway Intimate as close as  I can get.

Nigel

@Nigell

The Stage product is really, really good, with (as others have noted) several parameters you can influence.  For arrangements, it's a major upgrade from the free sample-based options on the market.

What you're asking, though, would fall into Pianoteq Standard territory.  Not sure there's a "pedal squeak" but there is sympathetic string vibration that really makes it sounds like a real piano.  As a example, you can gently press Middle C so that no note sounds, then bang staccato on the C an octave down or an octave up and hear (just like you would on a real piano) the sympathetic vibration from the Middle C string.  Hit another key, esp. one with few common harmonics, and you will not hear it so much.  I was just playing with this.

Even more, the C Bechstein has a duplex scale while the Bluethner has aliquot strings and this is reflected in the settings, and you can adjust their influence.  I've yet to analyze whether there is a difference in how these are modeled (Bluehtner's approach is a key brand distinguishing element), but they are at the very least labeled correctly in the "Design" section of Standard.

I think "Pro" has even more settings, but I don't own "Pro" yet.

I thought HiFi was consuming and Monitoring meant not for consuming, cause Monitoring is far more neutral and 'fatiguing' on the ears, like Electrostatic Earspeakers (STAX)
But I am certain that some branded 'HiFi' speakers are superior to many Monitors.
Can you clear up on this understanding?

There are several of the best hi-fi companies out there with fingers in both pies. They make extremely similar products for both markets. Spot the difference between say a passive or active ATC for the pro market and the version for the domestic market. Well the home version might have a pretty veneer, but this might also find it's way into a discerning studio that likes a visually pleasing environment too. 

On the pro side we have the technical benefits of active loudspeakers in terms of driver control (but pro companies also make passive models for pro use). On the negative side active loudspeakers need power cables, consumers cannot upgrade the built in amplifiers easily, no need for miles of fancy speaker cable..   

Yes of course a highly accurate hi-fi speaker with great amplifiers can be better than a cheap entry level studio monitors. Also of course there are loudspeakers that are voiced to sound pleasing or less fatiguing more than absolutely strictly flat as possible.

Audio Professionals and audiophiles are often using the exact same headphone models.
However there are some specialist headphones aimed squarely at the pro market - designed to be physically more robust  than their domestic counterparts need to be (cables being ripped out of sockets isn't an issue if the connectors aren't damaged) , better isolated - more sealed models in pro market, but  hi-fi headphones can be closed back too.

So there are Hi-Fi loudspeakers that can be used as perfectly capable studio monitors and excellent active monitors that can work as Hi-Fi in the home. This includes some budget Hi-Fi models  that will better the cheaper so so studio monitors. As you know room acoustics are the most important factor of all sadly.

Defenz0r wrote:

Key Fumbler wrote:

Hmm,  from a sound quality perspective in most domestic rooms you should be able to substantially improve upon any digital piano's internal speakers with a good pair of monitors or a good Hi-fi system set up correctly (and one is not necessarily more accurate than the other -too many variables, there are excellent examples of both - but monitors come with useful shelving controls FWIW).

I'm guessing you've still got terrible acoustic issues from what you describe, despite spending thousands!
Or you really, really don't like the loudspeakers you have.

Many won't have those issues even without spending a penny on room acoustics (and sure that's worth doing if you can afford it).  Let's say you had say a low sloping ceiling,  a parquet floor, lots of glass, no curtains, rugs, carpets,  a strongly reverberant room with little furnishings. Alternatively you could've gone the other way and killed reverberation almost altogether making the sound tiring - only suited to surround sound. So many ways a room could have unusual room acoustics issues.

Certainly the typically weaker bass output of internal speakers and their proximity mitigating room issues I can see a DP easily sounding better in very problematic rooms (emphasis on the very).

Of course the sound radiating directly from the instrument could be the most important quality of the sound for some folks, and we see that discussed on these forums from time to time. Certainly not to be dismissed.

You don't deserve these other acoustics problems after paying out so much money (assuming professionals dealt with your room acoustics).

You probably misunderstood me.
The audio quality is higher on dedicated speakers, but it isn’t possible to interact with the player the same way. Also (perhaps can confuse HiFi) with professional monitoring instruments (speakers). They require a far more critical positioning and fine tuning than HiFi, which is much more on the consumer end.

A real Piano is not a directional speaker, its more of a plane source.
And this is the big difference I can feel or hear.
For listening to mastered Music, directional speakers make not much difference.

But if you happen to need the player experience as close as possible (emphasis on close), then you aren’t going to get that with the directional speakers.
Notice on how room filling a real Piano is.

Also, the distance from the listening position to the speakers is super critical. On a real Piano, you will get close and distant sound due to the Piano is resonating.
For point source speakers such as monitors, you will get the distance but lack ‘close’, as resonating close to you is lacking.

I made it clear in my post that I understood your (and others) preference for the sound radiating from the instrument. This is understandable, and it has been a recurring topic, I already said that.

Actually your understanding of Hi-Fi loudspeakers versus monitors is factually and objectively backwards for the most part,  though I don't blame you, this is based on common misconceptions partly pushed bythe audio industry to differentiate their products for different markets. Yes some Hifi speakers sound sweeter than others - sometimes due to tonal balance, sometimes because they are plain better. This is also true in studio speakers If a speaker has a slightly rolled off treble, or slightly recessed mid this can be billed as being more suitable for less tiring long listening sessions in a professional capacity - or a sweeter more forgiving Hi-Fi sound! - same engineering tricks, different marketing.   

The majority of Hi-Fi loudspeakers do not have shelving tone controls, many pro monitors OTOH do. These actually mean they can be adjusted to the listening environment more easily, without say having to move the loudspeakers further from the rear and side walls, or buying a different amplifier in the hope that the tonal difference will change the sound significantly enough as you do with modern passive loudspeakers.

Now the principles that Hi-Fi loudspeakers and monitors work with are the same. They typically have the same or similar crossover frequencies, the same radiating patterns (monopole bass to forward radiating) from the treble handing over from and mid/bass (and the same issues - your little Neumann KH120As have a tiny waveguide as do many hi-fi designs today - slightly controlling the dispersion through low treble), the same bass loading mechanisms (and problems).

If you wanted to compare a planar electrostatic, magnepan, true omni or dipole design to a typical box speaker then things get interesting. Even so the sound wouldn't appear to radiate from the instrument itself.  So if that's the main thing for you probably best for you to stick to the internal speakers and occasional headphone use.

I thought HiFi was consuming and Monitoring meant not for consuming, cause Monitoring is far more neutral and 'fatiguing' on the ears, like Electrostatic Earspeakers (STAX)
But I am certain that some branded 'HiFi' speakers are superior to many Monitors.
Can you clear up on this understanding?

For me, the main difference is the tactile experience and string behaviour. When you hit the string when it already vibrates, the mallet touches it it different. That's what digital pianos ca't provide physically and Pianoteq can't mend it.

Neither could any other virtual instrument. Maybe a DP can be made to vibrate sympathetically, but good luck making that seem anything other than artificial.
It's down to what you value I suppose.

Me I would far rather have a sonically great digital model of a great instrument than any poor physical real world piano I could afford to have in my life, and I don't value the sound radiating directly from the instrument as much as others. However their desires are equally valid.

Key Fumbler wrote:

Defenz0r wrote:

Had the Neumann KH120A and already spent 4 grand on acoustic treatment. Sound worse than the Roland FP30 Onboard Audio. Because it sounded off. WIth headphones it is still better (PianoTeq)

Note that, if you are buying studio monitors, you even have MORE effort to make the room sound good, as they are what you cal “picky”

If you go consumer grade or even HiFi, things get easier.
Sounds weird, but it is like it is.

Hmm,  from a sound quality perspective in most domestic rooms you should be able to substantially improve upon any digital piano's internal speakers with a good pair of monitors or a good Hi-fi system set up correctly (and one is not necessarily more accurate than the other -too many variables, there are excellent examples of both - but monitors come with useful shelving controls FWIW).

I'm guessing you've still got terrible acoustic issues from what you describe, despite spending thousands!
Or you really, really don't like the loudspeakers you have.

Many won't have those issues even without spending a penny on room acoustics (and sure that's worth doing if you can afford it).  Let's say you had say a low sloping ceiling,  a parquet floor, lots of glass, no curtains, rugs, carpets,  a strongly reverberant room with little furnishings. Alternatively you could've gone the other way and killed reverberation almost altogether making the sound tiring - only suited to surround sound. So many ways a room could have unusual room acoustics issues.

Certainly the typically weaker bass output of internal speakers and their proximity mitigating room issues I can see a DP easily sounding better in very problematic rooms (emphasis on the very).

Of course the sound radiating directly from the instrument could be the most important quality of the sound for some folks, and we see that discussed on these forums from time to time. Certainly not to be dismissed.

You don't deserve these other acoustics problems after paying out so much money (assuming professionals dealt with your room acoustics).

You probably misunderstood me.
The audio quality is higher on dedicated speakers, but it isn’t possible to interact with the player the same way. Also (perhaps can confuse HiFi) with professional monitoring instruments (speakers). They require a far more critical positioning and fine tuning than HiFi, which is much more on the consumer end.

A real Piano is not a directional speaker, its more of a plane source.
And this is the big difference I can feel or hear.
For listening to mastered Music, directional speakers make not much difference.

But if you happen to need the player experience as close as possible (emphasis on close), then you aren’t going to get that with the directional speakers.
Notice on how room filling a real Piano is.

Also, the distance from the listening position to the speakers is super critical. On a real Piano, you will get close and distant sound due to the Piano is resonating.
For point source speakers such as monitors, you will get the distance but lack ‘close’, as resonating close to you is lacking.

I made it clear in my post that I understood your (and others) preference for the sound radiating from the instrument. This is understandable, and it has been a recurring topic, I already said that.

Actually your understanding of Hi-Fi loudspeakers versus monitors is factually and objectively backwards for the most part,  though I don't blame you, this is based on common misconceptions partly pushed bythe audio industry to differentiate their products for different markets. Yes some Hifi speakers sound sweeter than others - sometimes due to tonal balance, sometimes because they are plain better. This is also true in studio speakers If a speaker has a slightly rolled off treble, or slightly recessed mid this can be billed as being more suitable for less tiring long listening sessions in a professional capacity - or a sweeter more forgiving Hi-Fi sound! - same engineering tricks, different marketing.   

The majority of Hi-Fi loudspeakers do not have shelving tone controls, many pro monitors OTOH do. These actually mean they can be adjusted to the listening environment more easily, without say having to move the loudspeakers further from the rear and side walls, or buying a different amplifier in the hope that the tonal difference will change the sound significantly enough as you do with modern passive loudspeakers.

Now the principles that Hi-Fi loudspeakers and monitors work with are the same. They typically have the same or similar crossover frequencies, the same radiating patterns (monopole bass to forward radiating) from the treble handing over from and mid/bass (and the same issues - your little Neumann KH120As have a tiny waveguide as do many hi-fi designs today - slightly controlling the dispersion through low treble), the same bass loading mechanisms (and problems).

If you wanted to compare a planar electrostatic, magnepan, true omni or dipole design to a typical box speaker then things get interesting. Even so the sound wouldn't appear to radiate from the instrument itself.  So if that's the main thing for you probably best for you to stick to the internal speakers and occasional headphone use.

Many speakers are similar to point-sources in their radiation, with the sound attributes changing significantly even as we sway our bodies and turn our head while playing.  Real pianos are mainly planar-sources, radiating up and down on a grand, and front and back on an upright.

I got the most realistic sound out of my speakers by mounting them on stands facing upwards, and even placing them where the sideboards of my upright piano keyboard (which I use as my MIDI keyboard) block any direct line of sound transmission from the speakers, set to the left and right of the piano at essentially keybed level, and my ears. 

This orientation made a huge difference at achieving a realistic sound from both Pianoteq and other piano VSTs.  The only thing that I lacked was some of the higher treble detail, which I added back with smaller speakers, potted down, which I put to the sides but directly facing my ears.

Before giving up on your speakers, try orientations like this.

Thanks a lot for your great explanation.

However, I cannot give this a chance, it is a temporary solution, but nothing I would actively use as it is more working on how to improve than actually enjoying the instrument…

I got the most realistic sound out of my speakers by mounting them on stands facing upwards, and even placing them where the sideboards of my upright piano keyboard (which I use as my MIDI keyboard) block any direct line of sound transmission from the speakers, set to the left and right of the piano at essentially keybed level, and my ears. 

This orientation made a huge difference at achieving a realistic sound from both Pianoteq and other piano VSTs.  The only thing that I lacked was some of the higher treble detail, which I added back with smaller speakers, potted down, which I put to the sides but directly facing my ears.

Before giving up on your speakers, try orientations like this.

Defenz0r wrote:

davidizquierdo82 wrote:

Hi and thanks for your responses, I tried several configurations and toed in different angles, even combined both monitors with internal speakers (improved the experience but still off), so it's not that I didn't try to get it sound right.

I may need to spend more time (more years?) to still figure the "right" configuration, even considered buying a pair of those fancy expensive Neuman monitors just to see whether monitors themselves were culprit of the whole disappointment.

OTOH opposite to what you imagine above, I went back to the internal speakers which despite not sounding like a "real grand" they're still doing a good job at delivering a "instrument experience" at least, at this point I come to realize why these instruments are quite expensive for what they are, it turns out figuring the right speaker system configuration and matching it up with the sound of each single note is not that easy job... hence, brands like Kawai, Yamaha or Roland are still selling their DP I guess.

Of course not praising my CA97 DP nor putting PTQ down, it's just some thoughts I'm coming up with after years of experimenting.

I'd actually LOVE to one day see PTQ integrated in a DP (of their own or in collaboration with other brands), that would be a game changer I guess, but for now I'll please myself by using PTQ with headphones which is the best experience I could get out of it so far.

Still appreciating what other fellas can tell us about their experiences and configurations so we can learn more and eventually come to the perfect setup.

Thank you Defenz0R for your input too, I entirely agree.

Warm regards,
David

Had the Neumann KH120A and already spent 4 grand on acoustic treatment. Sound worse than the Roland FP30 Onboard Audio. Because it sounded off. WIth headphones it is still better (PianoTeq)

Note that, if you are buying studio monitors, you even have MORE effort to make the room sound good, as they are what you cal “picky”

If you go consumer grade or even HiFi, things get easier.
Sounds weird, but it is like it is.

Hmm,  from a sound quality perspective in most domestic rooms you should be able to substantially improve upon any digital piano's internal speakers with a good pair of monitors or a good Hi-fi system set up correctly (and one is not necessarily more accurate than the other -too many variables, there are excellent examples of both - but monitors come with useful shelving controls FWIW).

I'm guessing you've still got terrible acoustic issues from what you describe, despite spending thousands!
Or you really, really don't like the loudspeakers you have.

Many won't have those issues even without spending a penny on room acoustics (and sure that's worth doing if you can afford it).  Let's say you had say a low sloping ceiling,  a parquet floor, lots of glass, no curtains, rugs, carpets,  a strongly reverberant room with little furnishings. Alternatively you could've gone the other way and killed reverberation almost altogether making the sound tiring - only suited to surround sound. So many ways a room could have unusual room acoustics issues.

Certainly the typically weaker bass output of internal speakers and their proximity mitigating room issues I can see a DP easily sounding better in very problematic rooms (emphasis on the very).

Of course the sound radiating directly from the instrument could be the most important quality of the sound for some folks, and we see that discussed on these forums from time to time. Certainly not to be dismissed.

You don't deserve these other acoustics problems after paying out so much money (assuming professionals dealt with your room acoustics).

You probably misunderstood me.
The audio quality is higher on dedicated speakers, but it isn’t possible to interact with the player the same way. Also (perhaps can confuse HiFi) with professional monitoring instruments (speakers). They require a far more critical positioning and fine tuning than HiFi, which is much more on the consumer end.

A real Piano is not a directional speaker, its more of a plane source.
And this is the big difference I can feel or hear.
For listening to mastered Music, directional speakers make not much difference.

But if you happen to need the player experience as close as possible (emphasis on close), then you aren’t going to get that with the directional speakers.
Notice on how room filling a real Piano is.

Also, the distance from the listening position to the speakers is super critical. On a real Piano, you will get close and distant sound due to the Piano is resonating.
For point source speakers such as monitors, you will get the distance but lack ‘close’, as resonating close to you is lacking.

davidizquierdo82 wrote:

Key Fumbler wrote:

You almost certainly haven't heard the right loudspeaker system, set up correctly.
Experiment with loudspeaker positioning. Where you put the speakers will make a huge difference to the sound.
There are dramatic differences between the sound of different speakers and listening rooms.

Maybe even experiment with using the DPs internal speakers at a low level and the monitors at the desired full volume in the near-field at same time.

Perhaps for instance if you find treble too direct with the tweeters pointed directly in towards you as the listener.

Alternatively try using more extreme toe in - try it with the speakers crossing in front of you.

So many ways to listen with speaker stands, toe in, height. Get that right hard to imagine anyone would want to go back to internal speakers on a DP,  even a great one like yours.

Hi and thanks for your responses, I tried several configurations and toed in different angles, even combined both monitors with internal speakers (improved the experience but still off), so it's not that I didn't try to get it sound right.

I may need to spend more time (more years?) to still figure the "right" configuration, even considered buying a pair of those fancy expensive Neuman monitors just to see whether monitors themselves were culprit of the whole disappointment.

OTOH opposite to what you imagine above, I went back to the internal speakers which despite not sounding like a "real grand" they're still doing a good job at delivering a "instrument experience" at least, at this point I come to realize why these instruments are quite expensive for what they are, it turns out figuring the right speaker system configuration and matching it up with the sound of each single note is not that easy job... hence, brands like Kawai, Yamaha or Roland are still selling their DP I guess.

Of course not praising my CA97 DP nor putting PTQ down, it's just some thoughts I'm coming up with after years of experimenting.

I'd actually LOVE to one day see PTQ integrated in a DP (of their own or in collaboration with other brands), that would be a game changer I guess, but for now I'll please myself by using PTQ with headphones which is the best experience I could get out of it so far.

Still appreciating what other fellas can tell us about their experiences and configurations so we can learn more and eventually come to the perfect setup.

Thank you Defenz0R for your input too, I entirely agree.

Warm regards,
David

Had the Neumann KH120A and already spent 4 grand on acoustic treatment. Sound worse than the Roland FP30 Onboard Audio. Because it sounded off. WIth headphones it is still better (PianoTeq)

Note that, if you are buying studio monitors, you even have MORE effort to make the room sound good, as they are what you cal “picky”

If you go consumer grade or even HiFi, things get easier.
Sounds weird, but it is like it is.

Hmm,  from a sound quality perspective in most domestic rooms you should be able to substantially improve upon any digital piano's internal speakers with a good pair of monitors or a good Hi-fi system set up correctly (and one is not necessarily more accurate than the other -too many variables, there are excellent examples of both - but monitors come with useful shelving controls FWIW).

I'm guessing you've still got terrible acoustic issues from what you describe, despite spending thousands!
Or you really, really don't like the loudspeakers you have.

Many won't have those issues even without spending a penny on room acoustics (and sure that's worth doing if you can afford it).  Let's say you had say a low sloping ceiling,  a parquet floor, lots of glass, no curtains, rugs, carpets,  a strongly reverberant room with little furnishings. Alternatively you could've gone the other way and killed reverberation almost altogether making the sound tiring - only suited to surround sound. So many ways a room could have unusual room acoustics issues.

Certainly the typically weaker bass output of internal speakers and their proximity mitigating room issues I can see a DP easily sounding better in very problematic rooms (emphasis on the very).

Of course the sound radiating directly from the instrument could be the most important quality of the sound for some folks, and we see that discussed on these forums from time to time. Certainly not to be dismissed.

You don't deserve these other acoustics problems after paying out so much money (assuming professionals dealt with your room acoustics).

Key Fumbler wrote:

davidizquierdo82 wrote:

Hi,

It's been some years now since the last post, I wonder how much of a progress have you done?

I'm still trying to get PTQ sound as good as possible through my CA97, I'm having issues with the soundboard since it makes PTQ sound a bit "boxy"..

Monitors ITOH makes the whole experience less realistic, no matter how nice PTQ sounds, sitting in front of them and having the sound coming from 2 directional sound sources is just somewhat off to me.

I wonder if any other users having different approaches, or maybe it's time to give up and move on with the existing DP in the market?

Warm regards,
David

You almost certainly haven't heard the right loudspeaker system, set up correctly.
Experiment with loudspeaker positioning. Where you put the speakers will make a huge difference to the sound.
There are dramatic differences between the sound of different speakers and listening rooms.

Maybe even experiment with using the DPs internal speakers at a low level and the monitors at the desired full volume in the near-field at same time.

Perhaps for instance if you find treble too direct with the tweeters pointed directly in towards you as the listener.

Alternatively try using more extreme toe in - try it with the speakers crossing in front of you.

So many ways to listen with speaker stands, toe in, height. Get that right hard to imagine anyone would want to go back to internal speakers on a DP,  even a great one like yours.

Hi and thanks for your responses, I tried several configurations and toed in different angles, even combined both monitors with internal speakers (improved the experience but still off), so it's not that I didn't try to get it sound right.

I may need to spend more time (more years?) to still figure the "right" configuration, even considered buying a pair of those fancy expensive Neuman monitors just to see whether monitors themselves were culprit of the whole disappointment.

OTOH opposite to what you imagine above, I went back to the internal speakers which despite not sounding like a "real grand" they're still doing a good job at delivering a "instrument experience" at least, at this point I come to realize why these instruments are quite expensive for what they are, it turns out figuring the right speaker system configuration and matching it up with the sound of each single note is not that easy job... hence, brands like Kawai, Yamaha or Roland are still selling their DP I guess.

Of course not praising my CA97 DP nor putting PTQ down, it's just some thoughts I'm coming up with after years of experimenting.

I'd actually LOVE to one day see PTQ integrated in a DP (of their own or in collaboration with other brands), that would be a game changer I guess, but for now I'll please myself by using PTQ with headphones which is the best experience I could get out of it so far.

Still appreciating what other fellas can tell us about their experiences and configurations so we can learn more and eventually come to the perfect setup.

Thank you Defenz0R for your input too, I entirely agree.

Warm regards,
David

Had the Neumann KH120A and already spent 4 grand on acoustic treatment. Sound worse than the Roland FP30 Onboard Audio. Because it sounded off. WIth headphones it is still better (PianoTeq)

Note that, if you are buying studio monitors, you even have MORE effort to make the room sound good, as they are what you cal “picky”

If you go consumer grade or even HiFi, things get easier.
Sounds weird, but it is like it is.

davidizquierdo82 wrote:

Hi,

It's been some years now since the last post, I wonder how much of a progress have you done?

I'm still trying to get PTQ sound as good as possible through my CA97, I'm having issues with the soundboard since it makes PTQ sound a bit "boxy"..

Monitors ITOH makes the whole experience less realistic, no matter how nice PTQ sounds, sitting in front of them and having the sound coming from 2 directional sound sources is just somewhat off to me.

I wonder if any other users having different approaches, or maybe it's time to give up and move on with the existing DP in the market?

Warm regards,
David

You almost certainly haven't heard the right loudspeaker system, set up correctly.
Experiment with loudspeaker positioning. Where you put the speakers will make a huge difference to the sound.
There are dramatic differences between the sound of different speakers and listening rooms.

Maybe even experiment with using the DPs internal speakers at a low level and the monitors at the desired full volume in the near-field at same time.

Perhaps for instance if you find treble too direct with the tweeters pointed directly in towards you as the listener.

Alternatively try using more extreme toe in - try it with the speakers crossing in front of you.

So many ways to listen with speaker stands, toe in, height. Get that right hard to imagine anyone would want to go back to internal speakers on a DP,  even a great one like yours.

Hi and thanks for your responses, I tried several configurations and toed in different angles, even combined both monitors with internal speakers (improved the experience but still off), so it's not that I didn't try to get it sound right.

I may need to spend more time (more years?) to still figure the "right" configuration, even considered buying a pair of those fancy expensive Neuman monitors just to see whether monitors themselves were culprit of the whole disappointment.

OTOH opposite to what you imagine above, I went back to the internal speakers which despite not sounding like a "real grand" they're still doing a good job at delivering a "instrument experience" at least, at this point I come to realize why these instruments are quite expensive for what they are, it turns out figuring the right speaker system configuration and matching it up with the sound of each single note is not that easy job... hence, brands like Kawai, Yamaha or Roland are still selling their DP I guess.

Of course not praising my CA97 DP nor putting PTQ down, it's just some thoughts I'm coming up with after years of experimenting.

I'd actually LOVE to one day see PTQ integrated in a DP (of their own or in collaboration with other brands), that would be a game changer I guess, but for now I'll please myself by using PTQ with headphones which is the best experience I could get out of it so far.

Still appreciating what other fellas can tell us about their experiences and configurations so we can learn more and eventually come to the perfect setup.

Thank you Defenz0R for your input too, I entirely agree.

Warm regards,
David

davidizquierdo82 wrote:

Hi,

It's been some years now since the last post, I wonder how much of a progress have you done?

I'm still trying to get PTQ sound as good as possible through my CA97, I'm having issues with the soundboard since it makes PTQ sound a bit "boxy"..

Monitors ITOH makes the whole experience less realistic, no matter how nice PTQ sounds, sitting in front of them and having the sound coming from 2 directional sound sources is just somewhat off to me.

I wonder if any other users having different approaches, or maybe it's time to give up and move on with the existing DP in the market?

Warm regards,
David

You almost certainly haven't heard the right loudspeaker system, set up correctly.
Experiment with loudspeaker positioning. Where you put the speakers will make a huge difference to the sound.
There are dramatic differences between the sound of different speakers and listening rooms.

Maybe even experiment with using the DPs internal speakers at a low level and the monitors at the desired full volume in the near-field at same time.

Perhaps for instance if you find treble too direct with the tweeters pointed directly in towards you as the listener.

Alternatively try using more extreme toe in - try it with the speakers crossing in front of you.

So many ways to listen with speaker stands, toe in, height. Get that right hard to imagine anyone would want to go back to internal speakers on a DP,  even a great one like yours.

Pianos you can buy nowadays are psycho-acoustically optimized, so they sound good in even the poorest rooms.
Speakers, and especially professional speakers that are to be angled towards your ears aren't so easy.
They require a full study of room acoustics or somebody who set the room up for you in order to make them sound good.

Also don't forget: If you want the sound of a Piano, you need to have speakers who have as much volume as the Piano itself.

Or you are going to optimize them and the speakers that you are about to use. That's a costly situation. Don't do that.

I have put 3 grand in my room acoustics and theres still phase shift and other issues that make the speaker sound compared to the on-board sound unfavorable. It's not per se that it sounds worse, it just doesn't feel balanced in a lot of ways and is therefore far too unusable as it is also too exhausting to listen to.

Also agreeing with David. The sound directed at you doesn't feel comparable in the slightest.
It feels more like listening to somebody playing the Piano, rather than yourself.
Plus all the drawbacks I told earlier.

Hi,

It's been some years now since the last post, I wonder how much of a progress have you done?

I'm still trying to get PTQ sound as good as possible through my CA97, I'm having issues with the soundboard since it makes PTQ sound a bit "boxy"..

Monitors ITOH makes the whole experience less realistic, no matter how nice PTQ sounds, sitting in front of them and having the sound coming from 2 directional sound sources is just somewhat off to me.

I wonder if any other users having different approaches, or maybe it's time to give up and move on with the existing DP in the market?

Warm regards,
David

You almost certainly haven't heard the right loudspeaker system, set up correctly.
Experiment with loudspeaker positioning. Where you put the speakers will make a huge difference to the sound.
There are dramatic differences between the sound of different speakers and listening rooms.

Maybe even experiment with using the DPs internal speakers at a low level and the monitors at the desired full volume in the near-field at same time.

Perhaps for instance if you find treble too direct with the tweeters pointed directly in towards you as the listener.

Alternatively try using more extreme toe in - try it with the speakers crossing in front of you.

So many ways to listen with speaker stands, toe in, height. Get that right hard to imagine anyone would want to go back to internal speakers on a DP,  even a great one like yours.