Thinking of purchasing - should I buy?

Is it worth 6000$ to buy a V-Piano? No, not in hell.

Is it worth paying 250$ for Pianoteq 3 (+50$ expansions) and get free upgrades later, or very reduced price for next version? YES.

Is it worth learning what each parameter does to get vastly different sounding piano sounds (seems like you want this)? YES.

Is it worth supporting Modartt to produce even better models in the future? YES.

Is it worth trying to fit harpsichord and historic instruments in modern music? Yes, it can sound interesting See Tori Amos.

Think about it. Pianoteq feels the best and plays the best, you're the most connected with the sound because there are no static samples involved. It behaves like a real piano while sample libraries do not. Plus, it doesn't load for eternity.

I was in the same position as you back in December; not much money and in dire need of a good sounding and playing piano. 

Fortunately, I had already helped my brother build an 8GB/Quad/Velociraptor/Server2008x64 system specifically for EWQLP so I knew what an utterly disappointing waste of money such a venture was.

Since you mentioned the EWQLP Bosendorfer specifically, I'll quickly list its faults/inadequacies, none of which exist in Pianoteq:

1) Performance is shocking even on a quad-core system, for anything like Debussy, Chopin, Reger, Lizst, Brahms. 

2) Many samples ruined by traffic noise which wasn't picked up during QA (WAS there any QA?)

3) Hit bottom B with the sustain pedal down.  Hear how it plays a C? Not one single mention of this by any forum member.  Are any classically-trained pianists using this software?

4) Very difficult to play cantabile passages due to poorly matched velocity layers/triggering

5) Latest Play update for x64 wouldn't work; QLP complained the installed version was 1 version lower than the required one.  How can this be when the QLP was several months old and Play was brand new?

6) Where's my half-pedal, re-pedaling and sympathetic resonance?

7) Who would design playback software which could not take advantage of all available RAM for a single instrument unless the soundcard latency was made unplayably high?  I don't want to load a 48-track orchestra, I want to play solo piano!

Sadly, I cannot agree with you that PQ's C3 sounds exactly the same as QLP Bosendorfer.  I wish the C3 DID sound a bit more like it, albeit without the quantization noise, velocity layer issues and an artic going past the studio every 30 seconds.  It's very possible that PQ Pro will give me the ability to produce exactly the tone I want over the full range of the instrument.  Certainly the C3 can be made even more plummy by backing off the microphones, but also listen to the close-miked version; they're worlds away from each other.

In my opinion, and having been a sample producer myself I wouldn't say I'm unqualified to voice an opinion, QLP should never have made it into production without some serious work on quality assurance.  To read the forum and the comments of the producers, one would think it was the most incredible product ever released. 

By contrast, prior to the release of PQ 3 there were dozens of discussions about the perceived problems with PQ and ways of mitigating those problems through EQ and other settings.  OK, so PQ3 has only 2 new piano models and you're not into historic stuff.  Neither am I, and I do play Beethoven, Bach, Schubert etc.

Given the fact that the v2-3 upgrade was essentially free, I would certainly take issue with your assertion that the KIVR project was being done on my dime.  Clearly a hell of a lot of work went into the improvements in v3 and given the quality of the product and its playability compared with the competition, £220 is a steal.

When considering value for money I'd much rather have 2 basic good-sounding models that I can tweak to my requirements, which have none of the issues found in sample-based pianos and will play happily on a Pentium M from 2005. 

I'm confident that if you purchased PQ3 and spent a month playing it and possibly tweaking the pianos and recording settings, then returned to QLP, you would find the latter to be like playing an ironing board. Ultimately for me, it isn't the fine detail of the tone that impresses, it is the playability and musicality of the instrument which is worlds away from a bunch of samples, regardless of how prestigious the studio is claimed to be.

Best//Neil

I'm not sure any of us are qualified to discuss marketing strategies of Modartt really. Meaning that we probably have a small clue why the price is at that height, why the add ons are these, why they keep updates for existing customers free, etc. None of this makes sense if Modartt was EW (for example, and I'm a long term customer of theirs. )

About the price: Yes it does seem steep, but remember that you are effectively taking "eternal" updates. Not really sure if this will happen, but up to now I've not paid anything else and I've been updating like crazy every couple of months since 2007!

About the add ons: I'm only assuming, but I would dare to guess that there must be funding involved there. Modartt are only doing pianoteq now, which means that apart from selling pianoteq there's no other revenue involved. Researching is a possibility, and much worth the trouble in my opinion (otherwise there wouldn't be a pianoteq to begin with).

About the updates: Well... They are extra nice (?) What else can I say really? From the moment I started talking with the pianoteq people they've never failed to impress me with their every reply, every e-mail, every discussion. (Then again why would a customer care about all that?)*

* The answer is because with such customer service you are sure to be heard, and not get banned from SOL forums, for example, or silenced, or get sold a product which effectively does not work but to the state of art computers of today.

________________

On the topic now.

I have Ivory, since it was first introduced in the market. I rarely used it and I'm not using it anymore, at all. The engine, had some troubles, with off line bouncing, which I've no idea if it's been resolved, but it gave me trouble. The lack, back then, of sympathetique resonance and the such, also provided issues for me.

Then came pianoteq: I was completely stunned by the playability of it. The sound is not 100,1% there (especially in v 2.01) when I first got it, but the playability: Oh man! The lack of velocity layers, the responce to my fingers. A marvel.

And I also have the Garritan Steinway, which I also like very very much, being a classically trained pianist and composer.

The truth is that when I'm dealing with classical music, I do turn mostly to GAST, but for everything else, I always end up to pianoteq. And not only for piano music, which is brilliant! anything from toy pianoteq, to broken down noises, etc, pianoteq is there for me. Exactly because it's so customisable.

In the end of things Modartt is offering 30 (or is it 45? :S Or has it changed? :S) of a trial version, which is missing a few keys (ok, so it does...). This would give you all the information you need to buy or not the piano.

_______________________

On a personal level I always buy when I need, and very very rarely I will follow on a sale, or such. I just don't have things I don't need. Which gives me the opportunity to rarely feel bad about a buy I did. If you don't "need" it just wait. You do have 2 of the best pianos out there, regardless of the opinion of others really. QL Pianos are huge and are considered the "best", and Ivory has been a long contestant to be crowned "the best". QL Pianos should also be readily available for more contemporary approaches (pop/jazz/etc) as the demos show. Of course Pianoteq can also do that, but for someone who might not be making money out of music (no idea...) or for someone who doesn't "need" it right now (I did need drums, I just bought toontrack Superior 2, no questions asked, no delays. Gig was waiting) maybe waiting is the most reasonable course of action?

I do hope I've helped a littl.

I don't need 9 pianos. I need one.

My sister has two. Real ones. I'm not exactly sure why. She also has a big job, big house, big income, no children.

I have Pianoteq. Does she enjoy playing her pianos more than I enjoy Pianoteq? I don't know. We're still looking for an objective metric. (We are reluctant to siphon our brain endorphins, although she could arrange that. She can also arrange brain scans, but we haven't worked out how to run the cost past the accountants).

This paragraph is interesting:

1) I firmly believe that the future lies in physical modeling, NOT in samples.  I also believe that the producers of samples know this.

2)  When a supposedly reputable company starts offering "two for one" sales, I start to wonder why.  Can you get two BMW's for the price of one?  Not likely.

Could it be that they see the writing on the wall so to speak?

The truth is, sample playability has not improved, they've just gotten bigger, and the technology (recording a sound and playing it back) is limited.

Physical modeling is getting better, and it will continue to do so.

I truly believe that physmod will completely replace samples in time.

I won't stop anyone from buying samples - that's a personal choice, but I don't believe that samples are the future.

If one needs to ask the opinion of others as to whether or not to purchase something, it doesn't indicate any weakness or lack or decision making, but rather it indicates that more time and research is needed in order to have the "right feeling".

Glenn

Daniel,

If I wasn't clear in my last post, here's more to add.

Your thinking is that we should pay $50 for a Steinway.  Then another $50 for a Bosendorfer, and another $50 for a Yamaha.  That works for sample-based models, because you getting recordings of a Steinway, recordings of a Bosendorfer, and recordings of a Yamaha.

That sort of pricing model isn't beneficial for either developers or users of Pianoteq.  I'd like to think of the cost of Pianoteq as:

- Modeling different materials/hardness of hammers.
- Modeling different materials/thicknesses/length of the strings.
- Modeling different materials/shapes/sizes of the soundboard.
- Modeling the acoustics of the body, lid and room.
- Creating the user interface to tweak the settings.
- Many, many other things

Once these models are done, then it's a matter of adjusting parameters to give the instrument a particular character.  You're paying for the modeling technology, and the future improvements to that technology.  As the modeling improves, you'll get even better sounding virtual pianos, and more of them.

Price for that wonderful software is normal . If U compare to stolen soft from IT , yes it's big .... But be honest this small company did the best, & I think, that 250 euros for good instrument is normal price, even if U will compare to other soft samplers. Physical modelling instruments sounds more individual,- how U will play on them, sample based like clones,- less individuality, like if playing Peter , Stevie , John , Angelina ..... & so on, sounds good, but same clone , less nuances, like cheap pop standard .
Pianoteq is best , only needs little bit to "repair" Rhodes & Wurlitzer , & make one more sound , - like Hohner Clavinet , Celeste, Marimba ....
No problem , I'm not rich , but I will pay .

Hey, everyone

I've had a chance to skim through the difference responses from everyone, and would like to contribute my 2-cents on this.

I have the EWQL pianos, and I also have the NI Akoustik Piano, in addition to the Pianoteq model. And I use them all in different environments.

Playability? Pianoteq wins HANDS-DOWN every time. The velocity response from extremely quiet segments to loud is unmatched by ANYONE out there. Tones are great, and the ability to tweak it to suit your environment are unparalleled.

Sonically? In an environment where other the piano is surrounded by a rhythm section and/or orchestrations, Pianoteq doesn't always sit in the mix as nicely. Not that it doesn't sound great, but rather that it takes a lot of sonic space... which doesn't always work.

CPU-usage...? What CPU-usage? I don't want to be adjusting my buffer settings to compensate for piano sample libraries hogging too many resources. It's annoying, and latency sucks when trying to play a rhythm passage.

Price? I've more than made the money back from the initial purchase from using it on jobs. Remember, it's just a tool being used to create something. If it inspires you to produce better work, then it's well worth it.

Marketing, impressions of the company as a whole are irrelevant. Personally, I applaud their pursuit of this new technological approach in an over-saturated environment of incomplete sample libraries. I haven't need any tech support, so I can't comment on what their tech support is like.

Try the demo out, and if you like it... great! If you don't, then find the tools that inspire you & make you happy... and buy them instead :)

buy it! I have -0 regrets!

I agree with Glenn NK. Post 10.

Physical modelling of instruments seems to be the way forward. The only thing Pianoteq will have to worry about, is if it stands still and allow competition to over take it.

Links on physical modelling:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUh21Eje56g

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gn_uBjKTnkQ

http://www.lnt.de/lms/research/projects...p?lang=eng

Daniel: I agree with all the answers my fellows have given you. Despite that, I'd to tell you that you really must know what do you want in the medium/long term in regard of the instrument of your choice.
Almost 4 years ago, I made a conscious decision to return to music (I did 3 years of piano when I was 10, had an accident that affected my legs and both hands and left music "for good".... a mental job most of it of course), so I decided to surft for and instrument. Taking account of all factors I knew at the time, I decided for a Yamaha Clavinova 309pe, which, besides being a nice addition to anybody's living room, has all the gadgets a starter musician wannabe would care about and a little more. It has BTW a great sound and an incredible weighted keyboard. But this is off topic.
So I forced myself bit by bit to get into music after more than 25 years and, as with my rediscovery of music, came also PTQ. The first time I stumbled into moddart web site was like an epiphany!. I recall listening to the "demos" of Hung Sung I could not believe it. I had to get a credit for almost 5 grand in order to buy my Yamaha and here was a waaaaay much better instrument for aprox. 300 bucks....

Did I regret buying the Clav? Hell no. At least it has a good midi implementation. But as soon as I found the way to buy it (which was much complicated because some political issues in Venezuela and foreign exchange restrictions), I just hooked it up and forgot completely about whatever stuff the Clav has... since the only need I have is to get the best sound possible from a piano.

I work everything with ptq (Hanon, Beyer (I'm going through the first year at the Conservatory ), and last month I made my first private recital at home using it through a dedicated (and cheap) Dolby SR system.
I played the three Gymnopédies and Melodie and Danse Rustique from Matsudaira.

PTQ just made me proud. I got also the added benefit of training my ears better by comparing sounds.  It's not easy to explain since I lack some of the theory behind it, but everytime I hear a real piano at the conservatory or anywhere else, its like Im automatically analising the sound in terms of PTQ parameters,... even detecting problems with the sound boards or specific strings! Ha....! I never thought this would happen.

In the end, it all goes down to what one expects in terms of learning. For me, it all has been a long and difficult road to get here, but right now, I'd trade all my intruments just for keeping PTQ.

Good Luck

PS. As much I as have been craving, I've been unable to circumvent the legal restrictions here in order to buy the addons (I love the Wurly sound)... but I don't lose hope.

Ohhh... there is. I have already walked down that path. Moddart guys have been and, at the time, were excellent in making suggestions. Since its illegal to make the transactions through any venezuelan banks, the only possible way is to make internet transfers from an autorized venezuelan credit card of a max of US$50 (which is the total amount alloted by the system and the goverment to spend online within a whole fiscal year) to a paypal account, then consolidate several transfers from different paypal accounts into mine and then I can buy stuff. MInd that in order to get the 50 bucks I have to ask favors to people and pay them in advance and with the black market rate.... its kind of people live isolated in Venezuela!
Everything is complicated... albeit not impossible when you really want it.

Why not just take the chance on postal delivery and mail $50 currency ?  It's generally reliable... just put "The Chavez French Support Group" instead of Modartt on the envelope...

amen!  'more historic pianos please, Modartt!

Hell yeah, it's a science project! Modartt/Pianoteq is no ordinary software company. It's a handful of extremely talented super-nerds full on into mathematics, physics and music. The mastermind Philippe Guillaume is a professor of mathematics, and the scientific and mathematical basis for Pianoteq is openly available as the doctoral thesis of one of their staff Dr Juliette Chabassier, as well as in a number of peer-reviewed publications in leading scientific journals.

If you don't think that is right up there with the coolest things ever and that it's worth a couple hundred quid supporting that's a shame. Because this is the stuff that makes Modartt and Pianoteq so great, unique and more innovative than other companies focussed on appealing to the masses for the sake of maximising profits.

But it's fair enough that money's tight and it's up to you whether you want the product or not and whether it's useful to you and worth the money. No one can decide that for you. The demo version of the product is functional enough to give you a good idea of what the software can do. Even if you only get two basic instruments that come with the standard version of the software, it allows for so many tweaks of the parameters and also has a great selection of effects that let you create a large library of very distinct sounding virtual instruments (even with just "two" instruments). Maybe spend more time with the demo version, exploring the settings with the different instruments.

Edit: Doh! I did not realise this thread is six years old!! @oldionus I blame you! :-P

I have been using Pianoteq demo for years now, obviously I hate the limitations but I still haven't bought  it because of various concerns:

1.- The, more now, huge price difference between the price in euros and dolars. Even more compared to the retail version avaible at thomman. I really can't make the payment of the 349 USD knowing I could get it for 194 euros on thomman.

2.- You can't choose the pair of instruments you want, I don't like k2, I want the bluthner.

3.- Stage version is affordable but I don't like the way it outputs sound compared to standard (mic positions vs "headphones").

I have no doubt Pianoteq is a superior product to any sampled library, also saves precious SSD space. But I think if it was possible to pay the same 194 as the retail version in Thomman I would have purchased it eons ago.

I hear ya! The Aussie dollar is diving even deeper than the US dollar, so I feel your pain. And I agree that the Stage version is just a tease; the Standard offers so much more. If you're a music student (or professional teacher) there is a generous educational discount. (See "Buy" link on main site.) Maybe you should enrol in a music course if you get the opportunity. Could be a win-win.