"pure" Sound Recording presets - how's this thing *supposed* to sound?

What does "*really* supposed to sound" even mean?
Is Moddart meant to assume the average Pianoteq user has a high end playback system, no neighbours and so on?
Which actual piano or recording is your mental reference?

What dynamic range works for the average user, what playback level, what microphone positions, what reference (real player at keys or real audience perspective, naturalistic recordings or hyper detailed audiophile pleasing combinations capturing close microphone details and hall acoustics together?

Even with a live recording of a real piano in a room recreating a piano is entirely an illusion usually using just two stereo speakers; as with all the other experimental and mainstream formats  these are all fundamentally flawed, yet regular stereo can fool the ear/brain superbly). Combine this with an efficient mathematical model (based on concessions regarding the limits of real time CPU power) and a substantial amount of taste judgements based on growing experience and an ever refined model, matched to incremental improvements in average CPU performance.  Part art, part science, mainly the latter.

The thing is with Pianoteq you can increase the dynamic range, change or switch off  the microphone positions (change in standard and Pro), change or turn off the FX, adjust response to your keyboard and playing style..

You could start from the player positions, make a preset per piano without any FX applied, ramp up the dynamic range (use high end high power studio monitors at realistic volumes), disable microphone positioning (go stereophonic)  and go from there if you want.

is stereophonic indeed the reference model? Sounds like there’s still some processing going on. For to the degree there actually is a manual, if I remember correctly, is says something like stereophonic is there for backwards compatibility with lesser versions of Pianoteq, but yeah... I’ve tried this, and compared it to binaural. That’s also processed, and. You can do some interesting things with moving the position of the headphones/listening position that are cool.

Hey michaelhuisman,

you're expressing similar thoughts to my own early experiences with Pianoteq.

I'd definitely encourage you to keep on with the critical listening and keep imagining ways you would change settings to suit your applications. Time spent tweaking parameters is well spent - and returning to defaults regularly for sanity checks is highly recommended. You may take detours and feel like you're missing something at times but once some things finally take root you will notice your key progressions towards making best use of it.

Always begin by establishing a valuable velocity curve before moving to the other internals - that would be my prime recommendation. There's a world of difference in how things sound when the curve fits the keyboard and intention of the piece. That being settled, I'd move onto the controls for all things from tuning to hammers and spectrum profile sliders and so on as deep as you'd like to go, adjusting mics and reverbs or removing reverbs and using your own in your DAW etc. The final thing might be some subtractions or additions in the main pre EQ button, and some following post parametric EQ in effects if you'd like to push or pull some elements up or down per piano preset and even per piece depending on the goal. Sometimes, you might want a really pushed midrange but it would damage the trebles to an extent, but if a piece doesn't utilise those ranges it's moot. To me, each session is strategy along those lines - "What's the best for this piece in context". Another strategy might dictate a whole piano focus which could be less aggressively tweaked (closer to defaults).

To me, a recorded track using Pianoteq (well set up and with good keyboard) is for all practical purposes identical in quality to a recording of a real piano to work from to achieve a personality, in all but the very best A studios subjectively. I will route that track through my audio chain, plugins, returns and master each with my usual setup and various extras or omissions - glad to not have to do this physically TBH. The output can sound release quality without doubt, especially for piano within a mix in modern music styles IMO.

So for 99% of all novices through to performers and artists, it really should suffice for every task (with some effort and thoughtful application of params). I would place certain high expectation values regarding solo classical piano performances, at the highest standards and for the most faithful markets, in that 1% which may still be difficult to completely win over. Closer each update - and IMO nothing else comes this close.

For 'real piano in the room' piano sized cabinets with transducers/soundboard designs etc. entering the market using Pianoteq for the engine but for 2 stereo speakers, it's still as good as it gets.

You have begun integrating it into your way of thinking about your audio, as I did, and I'd do it all again without hesitating. The learning curve is supremely worth it. The years pass and you thank your lucky stars you pushed through

That's been my experience, hope some of this is worth your time - please feel welcome to ask more - there are a lot of Pianoteq users who have used it to great effect and I'm sure a lot of others would offer some ideas and advice in this thread. Always enjoyable to see these kinds of discussions.

It's worth having a play through the customer preset creations in the FXP corner too, some are pretty darn good.