http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr-k0_C_7Y8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bo0O1pC6...re=related

Hugh Sung play pianoteq by a digital baby Grand piano.
The second video compared pianoteq to a true acoustic piano.

Hugh said some people in audience prefered píanoteq to Petrof.

But I must agree the sound tone still have some road to go.

I mean, it's not bad at all, but to actually "fool" a performer, I just don't think it's no where near the right ball park yet.

Well maybe "fool" wasn't the best word for what I tried to mean, for the pianist perspective. What about "Inspire"?. Of course keeping it all true to a real piano sound.

I mean, it's not bad at all, but to actually "fool" a performer, I just don't think it's no where near the right ball park yet.

So, the ideal scenario is the CLP295 body and keyboard with a PTQ sound engine. Unfortunately it is a bit too expensive to take apart and build in the PC with Pianoteq.

Maybe if the on board speakers sounded fine withr PTQ you could just put the silent pc inside the CLP's body using its regular midi output. I almost did that with my old Roland!

nickfielibert wrote:

Romantic,
What you suggest with the speakers is actually already the case. The CLP-295 has two smaller speakers in the front pointed at the player.
I think the issue is more the amplitude  response (vs frequency). I'm just unclear about why this is different in the V3 vs V2.

I think you can use the Xlutop Chainer or something like that, and chain a powerful vst eq or enhancer to PTQ to tweak the sound. It all remains more or less like a standalone though. The chainer loads in no time including PTQ and all the vsts you want (it memorizes the whole setup) and takes almost no resources from the cpu.  By the way, what's the difference between the CLP's sound and feel and  PTQ?

PTQ feels much more like a real piano vs the CLP. THe yamaha has only 4 velocity layers and it shows. With 3.0 the low notes are OK now vs the yamaha. Thiswas a weakness before. If only Yamaha could build PTQ into this nice looking body. I'm using a silent PC in a Cabinet close to the piano with a wireless midi interface and an audio cable I'm detaching each time again to avoid wires in the living room where the piano is located. The touch and action are very good. I have the wooden keys.
So, the ideal scenario is the CLP295 body and keyboard with a PTQ sound engine. Unfortunately it is a bit too expensive to take apart and build in the PC with Pianoteq.

Comparing the digital piano "masked" as a real one, and a real one masked as a digital piano, I bet many people will think the the real piano is  digital one, and the digital one a real grand .

Oh yes. Had happened. Also with politicians...
Anyway, I'd like to use that kind of unobtrusive setup too. Problem is, I didn't find the right spot to put the speakers in an intimate living room to get a good (inspiring) perspective for both the audience and myself. That's why I started to think about the grand body thing. Still thinking...

What about the opposite???

If they get a compact digital piano with simple iron stand and very good  speakers, and using radio waves to send the keyboard performance to activate a real grand piano with pianodisk installed, and a microphone placed to the real grand piano, transmiting the sound signal to the digital piano.

Comparing the digital piano "masked" as a real one, and a real one masked as a digital piano, I bet many people will think the the real piano is  digital one, and the digital one a real grand .

Here a example, but using a upright piano. Just the blue Leds didn't look adequate to classic music.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0N4XacwfD5Y

Thanks for the link. It was great!.The leds looked very Phantom of the Opera. Just add some heavy smoke!

As a matter of fact, years and years ago, on a music show in the Netherlands Roland actually did that on their stand ... I think they used an RD1000 at the time which they placed in a grand piano body.

If the lid was closed, I bet there were a couple of speakers facing the floor, so everybody (and the pianist) can hear the reflected sound. Is what most upright digitals do (including my Roland). But when you try to use the lid to reflect the sound to the audience facing the speakers up, the sound won't reflect well to the player. I was thinking...what if we put  two heavy duty speakers facing up w/o any box at all, drilling the old sounboard and using it as a "baffle"? .The sound then will go up and down to the floor. We loose lows, but maybe the sound pattern will be ok. Thoughts?

Romantic,
What you suggest with the speakers is actually already the case. The CLP-295 has two smaller speakers in the front pointed at the player.
I think the issue is more the amplitude  response (vs frequency). I'm just unclear about why this is different in the V3 vs V2.

I think you can use the Xlutop Chainer or something like that, and chain a powerful vst eq or enhancer to PTQ to tweak the sound. It all remains more or less like a standalone though. The chainer loads in no time including PTQ and all the vsts you want (it memorizes the whole setup) and takes almost no resources from the cpu.  By the way, what's the difference between the CLP's sound and feel and  PTQ?

cheers
Hans

You will not risk to spoil a true expensive grand piano just to test this idea. 

;-)

Would be quite  hilarious if after the first music, case people believed it was a real piano, you change the preset to a very different instrument, like the bells.

Here a example, but using a upright piano. Just the blue Leds didn't look adequate to classic music.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0N4XacwfD5Y