BTW what does this mean? "Revoicing of NY Steinway D, HB Steinway D, Steinway B, Ant. Petrof, Petrof Mistral, C. Bechstein DG, Steingraeber, Blüthner." - I use the Blüthner, has the sound changed?
Yes, the sound has changed. We tried to improve it and make it more faithful to the original instrument.
In short, the main differences are:
- adjustment of the longitudinal modes (responsible for the 'buzzing' sound): in the bass and medium range, some were a little bit too pronounced (which was BTW pointed by jamiecw in this forum, see https://forum.modartt.com/viewtopic.php...65#p978665),
- adjustment of the quadratic modes, some were a bit too hot at fff,
- adjustment of the hammer noise, making it nicer in the treble,
- general revoicing, both at the 'factory' level (not visible in the UI) and at the preset level (visible in the Spectrum profile NE of some presets in Pianoteq PRO), making the sound of individual notes nicer and fuller,
- adjustment of the sympathetic resonances, with a better general equilibrium.
BTW what does this mean? "Revoicing of NY Steinway D, HB Steinway D, Steinway B, Ant. Petrof, Petrof Mistral, C. Bechstein DG, Steingraeber, Blüthner." - I use the Blüthner, has the sound changed?
]]>Well, any response to this? If it only works with string tension mode (why?!) that would render the entire thing totally useless.
MTS-ESP is a real-time tuning, it imposes constraints that do not allow us to re-use the regular tuning features of Pianoteq easily. Please check version 7.5 ( https://www.modartt.com/pianoteq#changes ), the situation with mts-esp has been improved a lot.
]]>julien wrote:The next release (which should happen next week) will have MTS-ESP improvements, including multi-channel tuning.
This is great news. Will the String Tension / Full Rebuild options then work properly with MTS-ESP? The issue was reported by another user under the topic "Problem in MTS-ESP tuning". Actually I haven't been checking that with the 7.4.2 release but I assume it's going to be fixed in the next one. Thanks.
Well, any response to this? If it only works with string tension mode (why?!) that would render the entire thing totally useless.
]]>The next release (which should happen next week) will have MTS-ESP improvements, including multi-channel tuning.
This is great news. Will the String Tension / Full Rebuild options then work properly with MTS-ESP? The issue was reported by another user under the topic "Problem in MTS-ESP tuning". Actually I haven't been checking that with the 7.4.2 release but I assume it's going to be fixed in the next one. Thanks.
]]>Microtuning already exists in Pianoteq; you just load a Scala tuning file in and retune away. I guess a fiddly workaround for what mts-esp gives you would be 4 separate instances with 4 modified keyboard mappings.
It does exist but if you are using MTS-ESP elsewhere for other synths, Pianoteq recognizes the global MTS-ESP instance and goes into "MTS-ESP mode." In this mode, it only supports single-channel tuning tables.
Having it pass the channel data to MTS-ESP along with the note data would completely solve this problem.
]]>Vadium wrote:battaglia01 wrote:MTS-ESP, which is positioning itself as a new standard for microtuning in software, has two types of tuning
All that is really required is just to send the channel information to MTS-ESP along with the note.
Yess!! +1
Microtuning could extremely expand the use of Pianoteq in Indian classical music, I am seriously into it for the last 20 years. Any folk music with micro tonality too !
So "Yes +1" too ))
Congrats on the win!
Microtuning already exists in Pianoteq; you just load a Scala tuning file in and retune away. I guess a fiddly workaround for what mts-esp gives you would be 4 separate instances with 4 modified keyboard mappings.
Not an issue with piano sounds but when I tried the mts-esp demo it looked to me like it works by sending out pitch tuning info on the fly, so I don't know what happens when you want to do an actual pitch bend!
]]>battaglia01 wrote:MTS-ESP, which is positioning itself as a new standard for microtuning in software, has two types of tuning
All that is really required is just to send the channel information to MTS-ESP along with the note.
Yess!! +1
Microtuning could extremely expand the use of Pianoteq in Indian classical music, I am seriously into it for the last 20 years. Any folk music with micro tonality too !
So "Yes +1" too ))
]]>MTS-ESP, which is positioning itself as a new standard for microtuning in software, has two types of tuning
All that is really required is just to send the channel information to MTS-ESP along with the note.
Yess!! +1
]]>1. The standard kind, which are 128 notes
2. The extended, multi-channel kind, in which the channel data is also used for tuning information, for a total of 16*128=2048 notes
Multi-channel tuning support is extremely important - otherwise, 128 notes is simply not enough range for most popular tunings. For instance, even with 24 tone equal temperament you only have 128/24 = 5.3 octaves, which is not even enough for a grand piano. For 31-equal you get only about 4 octaves and etc.
So this is a request to support multi-channel tuning tables, which lets you extend the range by using channel 2, channel 3, etc to get the missing notes.
All that is really required is just to send the channel information to MTS-ESP along with the note.
]]>