Nick

Also, very good observations, MeDorian. Output levels are a valuable part of finishing a recording or setup for playing for sure.

-10 normalization might be a good number to hover around.

If the limiter isn't going into the red, then chances are an output file (without a DAW etc.) can be as good as any busy personalized effects laden mix.. and -10dB seems intuitively a good number. (will try that!)

There's a lot of different 'LUFS' levels asked for by different online streaming platforms - and esp. solo classical piano is one of the non-pop genres which may not require to be too well aimed to, for example Apple Music's -16 LUFS or -14 for Spotify etc.

Each service probably uses similar but proprietary ways to level match for their listeners (I'm actually not sure about the nuts and bolts behind their differences).

Would be interesting to see how various -10 dB normalized piano files sound across platforms.. because, for Pianoteq users, you may have a quite magic number there Nick!

Although not Pianoteq related, it bothered me that my recordings did not match the broadcasting piano recordings on my TV, and so I was looking wrongly at Pianoteq settings. Again totally Pianoteq unrelated, I now believe DVD playback will be the same audio levels as TV broadcast, although I have yet to try this.

Nick

Eventually one aspect about a not-mentioned sound quality sometimes spelled "dull". In my opinion most important parameters against:

• Velocity curve first.

• Then acoustic volume.

• Then speaker quality.

• Headphone impedance.

• Limiter.

I think it's an excellent design and does its job without a hitch. Many 3rd party limiters would add latency and cost extra etc. but certainly some would have their fav limiters they may prefer.

I like altering the numbers, making it deeper and shallower, before deciding if I want it on/off. Often I prefer it on.

Overall, to me, it is not too deleterious to the piano signal (not like a brick-wall for example), and can assist in the case of wanting to further shape in a DAW. (like a set of tasteful pre-FX instead of a 'bare' un-dynamic recording). I keep feeling the need to add clarifying statements though and this applies often: everything depends on a particular goal - and use cases are many, incl. playing piano in a room and aiming for realism, playing live in a venue, and then recording, each may have infinite variant aesthetic systems and processes to account for.

IMHO there is no other piano software which satisfies so highly each of those kinds of user desires and demands.

The limiter is a type which some will prefer off (I'd think mostly inre solo classical purists).

If switched off, and if next lowering main output volume (by up to -15 or more so perhaps, to stave off the dreaded red bar, clipping), in a DAW you could "make up gain" either in the channel "input" volume, or with other plugins.

In digital signal flow, the 'character' some might feel they lose out on, would likely have less to do with the lower main volume, and more to do with what a 'normal' unprocessed audio signal can be like. Flat - a bit less dynamic, less exciting, less excited by the little things going on with limiters and compressors.

But definitely, if switching off Pianoteq's limiter, compressor, lowering main volume etc. in a recording, you may 'make up' anything you like in a DAW - raise volume, add your own fav compressor(s)/limiter(s), reverbs.

Most basic example might be, if you lower Pianoteq's main volume by -15 decibels, then raise the DAW piano channel/track's input volume by a similar amount, parity may be achieved and if anything is lacking in the signal, certainly it will be heard well enough to assess and decide "Hmm, do I really want Pianoteq's limiter off?" or "OK, now, should I add a compressor/limiter in the DAW".

What Pianoteq gives is an excellent starting point for anyone who may or may not have a desire to get fussy - but like groovy's test shows, at zero latency in case of the limiter is hard to achieve with good 3rd party limiters. (some I like add a substantial amount of latency which could negatively affect the 'feel' of the piano in performance.)

The limiter in Pianoteq, esp. when a gentle Pianoteq compressor is also engaged, gives, to me, a light but well established overall 'gain staging' effect. The goal often being to have not too low volume dips, not too high peaks and a lot of dynamic range positioned in comfortable listening range in terms of loudness. In a way, the elevation vs. limitation of certain aspects is all about aesthetic choice - there's no 'perfect correct' way - every person would pick different settings and say "There, this is the way I like it". Over time though, lots of people/companies collect guidelines for their known equipment/situations - and thankfully, Pianoteq does offer default settings which give a semblance of those good measures IMHO.

So, indeed switching off the limiter may give your signal a tiny bit more clarity but perhaps at the cost of some broad loss of a tiny sense of vavooom! of some kind (different per piano/preset etc.)

The compressor, if engaged with a desirable setting, raising up low volume characteristics and compressing high velocity ranges of course to an extent, and the limiter kind of warming things (kind of like the circus trick of keeping plates spinning on the end of small poles) has a nice range where extremely subtle saturation nears at maximum velocities - it's pretty cool that Pianoteq lays that kind of stuff out for any new users without them having to think about it until they become next-level about their sound.

People turn off a limiter (and also compressors or other FX in Pianoteq), esp. if the goal is to strip out all traces of artifice, as it may seem logical, though I think a good sound design will quite normally add a small amount of saturation to high velocity passages/notes - and modern digital age recordists are more and more appreciating the charms of what fine old analog recording systems brought to the table (completely clean digital recordings of anything can seem stark, lifeless and the lack of 'excitement' in the signal has often put me off in the digital space. But - great tools exist, incl. those in Pianoteq to make a recording sound more like.. a nice recording.

If a person's goal is playing their dpiano, then in a way, they may find some benefit from limiter being off.. but if the goal is recording, maybe turning off the limiter could help, but probably will require some other limiter/compression in a DAW to massage the signal - but then, some piano recordings ARE beautiful without great amounts of dynamics or 'analog' saturation/warmth etc. - again I guess, just down to personal aesthetics.

I feel in the end, the Pianoteq limiter is generally not adding too much saturation for most use cases, could generally help users' recordings sound better out-of-the-box, and importantly it helps new users from too easily clipping or experiencing too many surprisingly nasty transients, or even damaging speakers etc.

Because a limiter has "to look into the future" to prevent digital clipping, it interested me, how much delay/buffering this costs. To my pleasure I don't find a delay in my test scenario:

With Limiter OFF I played a key on my Korg B2 and recorded its internal sound and the external sound of Pianoteq 8.0.4 at the same time, one on channel R the other on channel L.

As expected Korgs internal sound arrives a little earlier, 8 ms before Pianoteq on my laptop with a USB Audiointerface (Scarlett 2i2 gen2). This had been with Limiter OFF.

Then I repeated it a few times with Limiter ON. Also just 8 ms difference:

Pianoteq Standard 8.0.4 (x86-64bit)
Steinway B Prelude
44100 Hz, 64 samples (1.5 ms), polyphony 256

Nick

I would say most of those issues you mention have been solved with much trial and error over the past week or so, and my latest video on this thread, 'Audio Levels in Pianoteq take 2' (as I call it now) is to my ears very good. I am now also viewing my -2.5 dB alteration in levels in this video, not as a correction to the Pianoteq preset, but that I need to reduce my playing style by -2.5 dB to 'play' at the optimum level in my future piano study/practice, in other words I've been playing too loud over the years.

Nick

Digital clipping always occurs inside the software whenever an audio level exceeds the 0 dBFS maximum allowed within it before distortion.  And whenever distortion happens, you get of course a red light indicating it.

The Limiter is useful also when you export your keyboard performance as an audio file one such as a WAV.  But, an alternative is just the file exported from the performance with a lowered volume set right before export out of the software and without the limiter even engaged.

You have basically two scenarios which can require a limiter.  One is when you play.  The other is when you distribute the performance as an audio file, that is, whether or not embedded within a video you intend to upload onto a streaming service.

Since a video streaming service such as YouTube necessitates video audio meet the service’s own volume limits of -14 LUFS that are different from level (dB) peak limits, you may just need to lower your PIANOTEQ Volume level and turn off its Limiter.  This way you may use a separate plugin limiter to get the -14 LUFS or lower.
https://youtu.be/BS07ChRkY4M

If you do decide to go with something lower, you have always the option of your original peaks preserved on YouTube.  It preserves lower LUFS in audio without it increasing any of that volume.  (I’m saying it won’t ever raise a lower -16 LUFS to the -14 LUFS ceiling or anything above your original choice of -16 LUFS.)

As you reduce PIANOTEQ Volume you accordingly do reduce any chance that you may require even the PIANOTEQ Limiter.  The opposite is also true here; as whenever you raise the PIANOTEQ Volume, the PIANOTEQ Limiter becomes increasingly necessary.

Well, I hardly call a normalized volume level —that is essentially just a louder file— an actual improvement to the file itself, thought it can improve your listening pleasure.

Normalization will up the volume level of any PIANOTEQ recording recorded at a Volume of -4 dB originally.  If the audio has been intended for a video, however, you should forgo any normalization.  YouTube requires a 1 dB (-1 dB) headroom as a minimum before its codec.  Normalized audio will lose volume after the transfer into the codec.  And, audio normalized while having a LUFS of -14 LUFS or louder results in distortion once uploaded to YouTube.

Anyway, you do realize PIANOTEQ can export normalized files whenever selected as an option?

Possibly, DaVinci Resolve permits VST plugin usage inside the video editor.  It’s free!

PIANOTEQ defaults might allow any forte performance reach as close as possible 0 dBFS without any unpleasant distortion.  They are an added convenience to me whenever I want to load a playlist folder and sometime later switch to iTunes.

I am suggesting the Limiter depends on the Volume setting in PIANOTEQ and often velocity from a keyboard.  An added advantage is with a laptop and without separate monitors connected to it, default presets which make use of the Limiter might play your MIDI files as loud as possible, outside of likely damage to internal laptop speakers.

I draw the line between any playback and my performance.  (As I perform I sometime will switch off the Limiter but then lower Volume since I can make very worthwhile volume adjustments at anytime on my audio interface instead.)

Ordinarily, PIANOTEQ defaults are acceptable at the playback of my piano MIDI files.  An exception is files that are from performances of a Disklavier and in Yamaha MIDI XP readjust PIANOTEQ Volume level to -7 dB. 

Generally, any velocity of 127 is preferable sometimes somewhere near 0 dBFS.

However when you do play at your keyboard, the Limiter might just depend on your playing accurately pianissimo, mezzo-forte and forte.

levinite wrote:

I think Pianoteq depends on its limiter too much when using the standard presets. Some midis actually distort (clip) a tiny bit when played back due to the real volume being a bit to high.

Yes, that's something that I battled with for quite a while before I started to understand the output volume. With a very dynamic midi played at default volume, the limiter will often be pushing quite hard, so you sometimes get a 'squashed' sound and, yes, quite a bit of distortion too. Best to reduce the output volume by quite a few dB if this starts happening. You can see how hard the limiter is working by the length of the line next to the 'L'.

I agree its certainly an easy fix. I just don't understand why Pianoteq chose the volume level so high for their default presets since they can get plenty of dynamic range with a lower default volume setting. It seems -4 to -6 or so dB would be enough to completely avoid the issue.

This is better. Steinway Model B Recording 3 (volume reduced by 1dB), flat levels from PC to Canon HF G26, no normalisation, and both piano pieces have slight reduction in volume edited in Powedirector (my video editor), this is shown on screen.

The audio past all my tests, first, to play back on mobile phone with headphones and to sound good, then, playback on a standard TV (the hardest to get right), with enough level. My PC system is easy because I used this during filming and editing. YouTube processor also I am happy with the results.

The Limiter I will use as in the presets, it was levels after all that needed sorting in my recordings (and playing).

Nick

I think Pianoteq depends on its limiter too much when using the standard presets. Some midis actually distort (clip) a tiny bit when played back due to the real volume being a bit to high.

Yes, that's something that I battled with for quite a while before I started to understand the output volume. With a very dynamic midi played at default volume, the limiter will often be pushing quite hard, so you sometimes get a 'squashed' sound and, yes, quite a bit of distortion too. Best to reduce the output volume by quite a few dB if this starts happening. You can see how hard the limiter is working by the length of the line next to the 'L'.

Nick