I am slowly coming back to Pianoteq (Page 1 of 2)

Yes, I would say Pianoteq is very close to surpassing everything on the market and within the next few updates if they get it right.
My biggest gripe with Pianoteq is the attack when you play hard it does sound a bit too harsh and loses musicality. But I did find that if you take away the reverbs and delays they add on the pianos, they do begin to sound a lot more full and bodied.
But yeah it is close, very close they are not far at all. One thing I do like about Keyscape is the separation of the notes especially on their upright piano. I have the U4 for the Pianoteq and it does lack a lot of body, I do think U4 is a weak link in Pianoteq and wish they would give it a major makeover in the upcoming updates.

Yeah their reverb isn't great, it is why I tend to not use it and use external reverbs.
They are definitely on the right path. Maybe they already have the formula for it but just waiting for computers to catch up on the processing speed.... Once they iron out some of the harshness I think they will be leaps ahead of everything else including Vienna.

I used to be a lot more of the opinion that reverb needed more work - but much has happened in that time. Now we can get a lot of traction from using 'tone' and balance between early reflections and tail of reverbs. Convolution reverb = arguably the "best" kind for realism - and it's an option inside Pianoteq - no need for a DAW for this - just find IR files online which measure real spaces and/or hardware equivs). For example, searching this forum for IR files will find a bunch of threads with links to good sources (it's as simple as downloading these and when in Pianoteq, choosing convolution reverb and loading one, like "Church-centre-aisle-omni.WAV or whatever you've downloaded from many collections around, many if not most for free).

The whole system feels more integral now - not to say I don't prefer all the nuance availed from some of my fav reverbs in a DAW - but still I think it's fair to say that reverbs in Pianoteq have quite come of age. There was a time where I didn't feel that way - but I'm beyond extra fussy with my reverb strategies in a DAW - and honestly, those are never going to be reproducible in any individual VSTi let alone in Pianoteq (gates and different diffuse layers/tracks with different widths and close blended subtly and so on).

But, having said that last para - when just sitting down to play Pianoteq, I don't need or want all that - that's post production to me in my usual use-case-scenarios.. and over time, I'm definitely coming to a view that I'd love improvements to reverbs - but I don't think Pianoteq needs to build that side of things in, unless more tied to the model perhaps (shootin' the breeze). For example, logically, a person using player perspective on speakers already has own room acoustics on top of whatever added reverb, and on headphones then reverb itself might be wanted for sweetening a little.. but in some ways, maybe reverb is incorrect here as the pinnacle item for re-creating an overall reality - and so again, I think much of this will end up as much a part of the engine, as engine+reverb.. again, time is going to tell how far and in which direction things travel. As it is, I couldn't be happier though with my options.

@Deyfidpetro - it's good to see your opinion I love to see how others are appreciating what's possible with Pianoteq. Like a broken record, for me, it's indispensable now.. and the only software piano I will work with (too many good reasons including increasingly realistic playability and pliability).

There's no limit to how I can make it sound in a DAW.. trying that with other sampled pianos, or even a nice recorded piano track is a brick wall learning moment. Being able to audition dozens of beautiful pianos for any MIDI performance - then being able to change anything about those pianos (using reality-based controls before getting into anything to do with post production).. limitless.

Re. U4 not sounding the way you want: all I can think is "Give it time, you will learn the controls".

Honestly - EQ (pre and post inside Pianoteq) just give a tilt to your bass in pre (main Equalizer button).. and maybe sculpt a little EQU3 mids.. sincerely hoping that helps you gain some body in your U4 presets. (I've posted a fair bit about EQing for different effects - hoping it helps Pianoteq users understand "body" or "attack" and all these things can be enhanced or cut with the controls before even thinking about a DAW).

For giving some body/depth to an attack which you hear as too brittle for instance, try moving the "energy" slider to the right (to something like 0.06). This is like stretching it - with still some recognition of physics in the model.. I do this little trick a lot - between 0.01 and 0.04 mostly.

Once I came to Pianoteq, so I don’t leave it. This is still the best response of a virtual instrument to a player’s actions. The library may sound nice - but it's only for the listener. The pianist is important to interact with the instrument. Also, the sound of the Pianoteq leads to the fact that you can play for hours without fatigue. But, in my opinion, the place where you can find synthesis is the interaction of the string with the deck. Now, it seems that the sympathetic resonance of the strings is being modeled as a new sound layer. This brings extra and extra heartbeats. The string sounds as if it is firmly fixed at the ends. This is heard in sound, attack and development. But one end that is attached to the rod is actually movable in all directions when the deck vibrates. It seems to me that in this place there are chaotic interactions of vibrating bodies. Here, harmony and chaos are struggling. And to calculate this process in our time is very expensive for the processor. Especially expensive in the volume of a musical instrument. But these days there are many people who are trying to understand, describe and solve the interaction of related oscillations. It is extremely interesting and exciting! Therefore, what is today - an excellent tool with a mint request to the processor - is amazing!
And Bechstein continues to conquer me!

Are you sure VI Labs uses physical modeling to make the Ravenscroft 275? Where did you get this information?
On the VI Labs website it says the following:

At VI Labs we believe that some instruments truly can inspire and take your creativity to new levels. Ravenscroft 275 is one of these rare instruments. This one-of-a-kind concert grand has been recreated using nearly 17,000 samples and 4 discrete microphones, controlled from an easy to use interface. Our goal was to emulate all aspects of the 275's detailed voice using the latest sampling technology and let this amazing piano speak with clarity. The result: a virtual piano like no other.

Sorry I was reading a review and mis read it. The lady doing the review said the playability of the Ravenscroft 275 is like modelling. Maybe they have used sampling and modelling for the playabity of the instrument itself.
I personally think what the guys have done over at Sample Modelling is the right way to go, fuse both worlds together.

By no means am I slating Pianoteq at all in fact out of all the VST's I have I have come back to Pianoteq because it instantly inspires me and I literally get lost in it. I confirm the authenticity of it when I went to a Steinway and Sons dealer in Frankfurt and the Model B sound like a replica it was amazing I was stunned, truly. So it is amazing g what they have achieved. Like I said I feel Pianoteq is an investment not just a sample library.

Roland also offers a fully modelled piano comparable to MODARTT PIANOTEQ, but in the portable stage piano Roland RD-2000.

Have a look: https://www.roland.com/us/products/rd-2000/.

I agree with you. The fact that I have this "sampling" disgust is simply because it discomforts me to think that someone played that note before me. Playing a note that is actually a reproduction of a note that has already been played by someone else that I don't even know who it is. Regardless of whether she really played with that intensity or detail.
Already in pianoteq it claims to be authentic, in the sense that the notes are played in real time by the player himself, and not based on what someone else has previously "played" and saved.

Should I live to be 10000yo I'd never have thought of that!  And even if I had,  I'd think with fondness of that person, who, even as we type, may be breathing his/her last.  Or having a drink with Donald Trump.  Or a relationship with . . Better stop there...Interesting thoughts!

Well, many sampled pianos were actually played by a computer driven system, of which the sampled Bechstein Digital is a fine example. The keys weren’t played by a human hand, but by the mechanical system, in order to capture different playing nuances.

Edit: I believe Sampletekk did some of its libraries in a similar fashion.

I just deleted my own post.  It seemed backwards and confrontational anyway!

Haha thank you, I think this topic went a little bit off route for a minute but appreciate the diversity of comments haha.

When I put the  three piano VST's that I have together: Keyscape, VI Labs Ravenscroft 275 and Pianoteq. Pianoteq seems to feel alive the other two seem dead almost like I have to force myself to be inspired, but with Pianoteq I just have to touch a note and I am instantly inspired to write.

I have played on the Roland RD2000, although I love it's silky smooth action I didn't like the piano sound, too tinny and didn't have the same character as Pianoteq in terms of inspiration.
There will always be a market for sampled pianos but I do feel modelling will eventually take the crown.

I just hope Modartt do more upright pianos as I feel we enough Grand Pianos for now.

Some vintage models would be nice and make them as full bodied as the grand pianos too.

I really need to get myself a midi keyboard with wooden keys. I have the Roland A88 which is great but I miss the feel of wooden keys.

Of course friend: I'm from Brazil!
Sorry my whereabouts are not in my Login. I will try to add this.  

Funny enough I used to own a Kawaii VPC1 then I bought Keyscape (This was at a time when I thought Keyscape would be better than Pianoteq) so I bought an A-88 because with compliments it better but I miss those wooden keys and the authenticity of it. I am looking at the Lachnit MK23 but it is a lot of money for a midi keyboard. The A-88 just feels a bit gummy at times and not fluid enough. Any one ever tried the SL88 Grand?

Let me just say, if I were coming back to a good, or, familiar sounding piano from my standpoint, I’d come back to a Baldwin grand, ostensibly, as a Pianoteq model.  Anywhere anytime I could call that enough!

That's just so nice a saying that I had to quote it! )) (although I don't feel the same) (but maybe will start doing so now?)

I have Keyscape (and a dozen or so other Piano VSTs.) While I like the electrics, I find that LA C7 loathsome. Even if I want an electric/acoustic layering, I now tend to use an electric from Keyscape and a Pianoteq piano blended together in my DAW. Also have VI Labs Ravenscroft 275 (and True Keys) and Garritan Abbey Road CFX. I am so unimpressed with those VSTs that I've uninstalled them... and a number of others.

I have both Keyscape and the VI Labs too. One thing I find with VI Labs is that it is always so damn quiet.... Also whilst the attacks are great on both pianos I find them both really hard to get emotionally involved in. The problem is they both sound too compressed, Ravenscroft is worse for that, it just feels dead. Slow passages on both are really hard to get any meaningful performance out of.

The biggest problem for me with Pianoteq is:
A. The attack. Just not clinical enough, especially in the mids.
B. Warmth. The body isn't warm enough yet.

But yes, I get more inspired by Pianoteq than the mentioned sample libraries and can craft an actual performance.
Just fitting Pianoteq into a mix can be a bit of a minefield.

Well, personally I’m one all for preamps as some possible future effects MODARTT might want seriously to consider, especially, since often gigging musicians like yourself complain about the presence of the sounds from the pianos at the venues.  (See my topic post: Vote Yes or No for Pres.)  Many of the posters whose loudspeaker or monitor setups consist of just two (2) enclosures as outputs are very likely soon going to need all the help they possibly can get, if they’re honesty really expecting to eventually have the illusion of some real acoustic piano before them as they play and got the entire piano sound coming perhaps from only two (2) speaker points also.  Not to mention, the typical enclosures they use might have woofers no larger than only eight (8”) inch diameters.

Although, a manufacturer like Roland or Kawai seems only to expect a realistically acoustic sounding digital requires no less than a whole array of several speakers and amplifiers: a lot more than a VST average user’s two (2) near-field monitors allotment.  See graphic (below):

Whether the VST digital piano monitor setup in your own environment is right against a wall or far from it, in lieu of any specially designed cabinetry and unique speaker system, some sort of preamp is possibly going to be your most effective tone sculpting tool anywhere inside the home listening and playing (performance) space. 

The preamp as an effect permits separate speaker volume and equalization adjustments no matter your setup (active or passive) and location, even if that’s in a corner of your room or at a gig.  And, preamps do allow independent compensation throughout any unforeseeable room irregularities including odd room shapes and even room furnishings, because you can adjust individually the volume and tonal output from each speaker one at a time and differently via each preamp pair of equalizers!  Just as easily you can equalize left output differently from that of the right, middle tones in the stereo field are able to vary significantly from the sides through the preamp units housing the pairs of equalization (eq) controls receiving input from the choices of mics used.

Presently when underneath mic selections you cursory click on the EFFECTS wording above the three (3) fx slots in the interface it will reveal a drop-down menu which could accommodate simply additional selections (effects) such as the means to preamp fx slots and others reachable via something like graphical display arrows if ever at all put on and included into that menu, so that all of which could someday also permit extra effects usage in addition to the mere three (3) at a time simultaneous use and view limitation currently available without such effects offered in a bank selection  —of more than just always the visible three (3) of course.

Possibly, MODARTT focuses largely to target a niche in the market which is for all the music of the European classics, while Spectrasonics is targeting musicians obviously interested in the more contemporary.  I too have both MODARTT and Spectrasonics (Trilian) instruments.  Which I like.  Although as a jazz musician primarily, I certainly have to admit Keyscape sounds are indeed identical to popular recordings.  It maybe just lacks PIANOTEQ’s microphones and their placements.  Which if were today aided by famous modern producers’ presets along with some of the mic preamps specifically professional piano recordings have been given to use, probably no need for Keyscape would ever exist, just as you say!

https://youtu.be/svX6WRWBP8o

I must admit I wasn't keen on the A-88 when I first bought it, I previously a Kawai VPC1. As time has gone on and I have the chance to really play with it I would highly recommend it. It is a great keyboard and in my opinion better than the VPC1. With the A-88 I find I can craft a better performance from it rather than the Kawai and it is more versatile across the spectrum.

I would say the A-88 is a great controller. Once I get the funds I will invest in the MK II because I do miss wooden keys. But overall a great piece kit and you can travel with it also.

I would say the A-88 is quite a fast keyboard once you get used to it. The MK II will be faster. Might be worth looking at the Roland RD2000 or the FP90 which will be faster, they are very smooth key beds.

An interesting competitor at only half price of the RD2000 is the Roland RD-88, which has the same PHA-4 action as the FP60 and even the A-88 MkII, actually preferred by many, plus a plethora of 3000 tones as well as SuperNatural acoustic and electric pianos, MainStage compatibility and speakers (which is quite exceptional for a Roland stage piano).