Quality of sound through speakers- something off (Page 1 of 2)

Without knowing much about how your listening environment is arranged, my first guess is that there is some sort of "room mode" (cancellation caused by the size of the room or the distance between speakers and walls) or problem with the speaker alignment.  For example, the speakers may be too close to a wall or not angled correctly (proper stereo field is very tricky to set up and may not be consistent throughout the room if you listen in multiple places), or the room might benefit from acoustic treatment of some kind.

Do you mind sharing more about the dimensions of your studio and where everything is placed?  That might help us give more useful suggestions.

Thanks for getting back to me! I am in a small room but have now tried 5 different sets of speakers and different placements. Something is missing especially in the mid range. I get such a full sound even from junky headphones.

Hi rocbryan,

this has been a topic over and over again, unfortunately not with a very happy outcome.
I had the same issue long time ago, I tried it with Audio Technica ATH M50x headphones it Pianoteq sounded really really good!
Then I connected it to my Yamaha HS5 - flat and lifeless. Then I bought JBL LSR 308s... it still felt lifeless. I bought a Focuscrite Audio interface because I thought it is my Macbook... no improvement. Then I bought another Audio Interface from Mackie, still no improvement.
Then I thought I might be missing a subwoofer... so I got the LSR310s, but still the sound didn't sound close as good as on headphones.

Honestly the best speakers I had through Pianoteq were the iLoud Micro Monitors. With those Pianoteq sounded better with some settings (steinway D intimate, Bechstein sweet). But let me save you a lot of disappointment, it will never sound as good as on headphones. It's just a different ballgame when you use headphones.
I also just bought a Kawai CA 98 two days ago, it's got 6 speakers with the soundboard designed to make you feel vibrations etc. It's good, it sounds not bad through speakers but it's like 10 times better through my headphones compared to speakers. I guess you would have to got for like SUPER expensive speakers plus room treatment to somewhat simulate a headphone experience.

What you could try is to play with the effect equalizer in Pianoteq... give it a bass boost for instance, I bet it will make it sound better through your monitors, but it won't sound as clear and still punchy and full of dynamic as it does through a headphone!
I'm sorry I don't have better news and probably some people in this forum might say not it will sound AMAZING through speakers but
the truth is tricky, however there is only one version of it

I love Pianoteq, especially through my headphones it sounds really good and playability is great. It's not just Pianoteq, as I said even my new top of the line digital piano sounds much better through headphones than through its advertised speakers and soundboard, which is not bad, it's ok but it doesn't have the wow effect.

In case you have the chance got to a music store and try Pianoteq with some iLoud Micro Monitors, those somehow sounded better than my Yamaha HS5 and JBL LSR 308s. Again tricky but the truth is the truth!

Keep us posted about your progress!

Hello All,

I have been making demos for Pianoteq for more than ten years; many of you have heard them on the Modartt website.  I have come to my own conclusion that the audio signal sounds quite differently, depending on whether you play the audio on loudspeakers or with headphones.  The same dichotomy of sound is also true for commercial recordings of analog pianos.  Here is what I hear:

When playing Pianoteq (or Organteq) through headphones, I enjoy selecting reverb with longer release time such that it feels as though the sound is coming from all around me.  This is a very plausible effect.  However, when I play the same recording back through my B&W Matrix 801 Series II loudspeakers and Krell amplification, the same recording that sounded fine in headphones ... now is awash in too much reverb!  When I mix using the B&W 801s to get a suitable sound, then the instruments sound too dry through headphones!

How do recording companies cope with this difference in perceived sound?  Often they will "duck" the reverb, until such time as the piano's sound is momentarily silenced, such as at the end of a musical phrase.  The effect of ducking the reverb results in a sound that is far clearer (less muddy) sounding through monitor speakers -- during fast passages -- and the reverb is heard when the music stops momentarily.  I have heard this effect a number of times in my AKG 702 headphones when playing commercial recordings of classical solo piano music, and a cappella singing such as the King's Singers.  There is a compromise in usage of this effect, so as to make the audio sound less muddy through loudspeakers, yet not too obvious when listening through headphones.

My two cents worth.

Cheers,

Joe

Hello Mr. Ra,

Thank you for your kind response about my insight to the dilemma of headphone- vs loudspeaker sound.

One might logically ask, "Why is denser reverb more tolerable when audio is listened through headphones than through loudspeakers?"  I can only answer for myself:  Since my ears are physically located further back along my skull than the backs of my eyeballs, I perceive the headphone's sound to be centered/originate somewhat behind my eyeballs.  It makes sense that when I hear reverb in a given room's acoustic, I am also subtly (or sometimes non-subtly) aware that I am present in an acoustic space that exists 360 degrees around my head, as well as being able to detect and up-down characteristic to the sound.  I believe I can tolerate more reverb in an audio signal when listening through headphones (as opposed to two-channel loudspeakers) because more reverb gives me the sense of being in that acoustic space behind me while wearing 'phones.  Contrast that with the annoyance of reverb and the original music audio signal originating from in front of my face when listening to two loudspeakers.  No matter how good the latter are, it seems unnatural for both the original musical event AND the reverb to originate from the same two speakers.  Some people might describe this artifact as sounding thick, muddy, or unclear when listened through loudspeakers.

. . . . .

My previous reply failed to state that "ducking" of reverb better translates to reducing (rather than totally eliminating) the amount of reverb until the musical signal ceases.  I may have incorrectly given the impression that a kind of brick wall or gate completely silences the reverb when the piano is actually playing.  It is all a matter of degree to find an amount of ducking that conveniently goes away ... without any electronic artifacts such as "pumping" being heard, especially with a musical instrument such as a piano.

Cheers,

Joe

I’m now curious to know whether or not to your liking (through loudspeakers), you’re able to get sounds as advertised from Pianoteq audio demos.  Just as WYSIWYG (what-you-see-is-what-you-get) made a popular expression often used as jargon in comedic routines and later seriously in references to any computer printed document (printout), what-you-hear-is-what-you-get might just apply!

Seriously, I would like to urge you maybe to listen to the examples appearing within the thread Engineering Pianoteq Steinway B Close Mic Preset, if you are alarmed at the possibility an incoherence or some sort of a cancellation, as tmyoung puts it, is a plausible cause for your dissatisfaction.  That thread came about a need I felt when some discussion was needed on the topic of piano audio engineering  —of the present presets with outside compression and equalization.  Which along with other outside processes and effects are possible solutions to the problems you face conceivably by phase cancellations.  That can frequently result in attenuated or altogether missing piano tones.  Those which were fully present before the piano instrument was recorded, by multiple microphones (placed perhaps too densely to your standard) inside a single session.

Please feel free to use the furnished link to the aforementioned thread and after a visit to it leave a comment.  (Let me know whether or not it’s helpful.)

Incidentally, the saying “What you see is what you get.” was started by a well remembered once comedy entertainer by the late great Flip Wilson.  Anytime I saw a skit of his, I got more than just a chuckle.

If you're wanting to duck your reverb signal in a hurry and willing to pay nominally for it, you may become interested in Perfect Room reverb by denise.  It has a ducker that requires little or no skill level since I've used it  —and I'm just an amateur (audio) engineer!  It's relatively easy to operate, no harder than a compressor. 

Momentarily, I forgot I got it last month while it was on a sale at Plugin Boutique: https://www.pluginboutique.com/products...REE-Slappy.

Hello All,

Thank you for your kind remarks in the time I first mentioned "ducking" in this thread.  It was originally a reply to rationalize how to reduce the difference between what is heard in headphones versus what comes across in loudspeakers.  Please note that when I furnish a demo to Modartt for their use (with my expressed permission) of my demo performances, I usually give Modartt a midi copy of my live performance, and let them do whatever they wish with the sound.  To my knowledge, they do not resort to ducking of the reverb in any way.

What I have found, instead, is that when I use headphones with any given Pianoteq instrument, I usually listen via Recording 2 or Recording 3 presets, and the Condition slider moved slightly to about 0.20.  When I use Pianoteq through my B&W Matrix 801 loudspeakers, I usually select a Prelude patch or even Sweet (or Warm) patch.  As implied in my original reply, I like the Recording -2 or -3 presets with headphones because I can "hear" some of the room's acoustic, but that the same Recording -2 or -3 presets used with large monitor loudspeakers can sound slightly thick or the reverb sound is a tad too much; in which case I switch to Prelude or Sweet (or Warm) presets, and go from there.  A long time ago, when I did most of my work with AKG 702 headphones, I couldn't understand why the Prelude or Home or Jazz presets sounded so "dry" to my ears in headphones!  Now, I know the answer is that there is something for everyone in terms of presets that work well with either speakers or headphones.  My use of ducking is my own way of compromising how to make loudspeakers get along with the headphone experience, and vice versa.    There is enough variation from instrument to instrument that I have never suggested that Modart furnish a type of ducking function to the list of presets.

Cheers,

Joe

Another basic thing to try:
See if Pianoteq still sounds good with headphones, but without any reverb. If so, try with speakers again, and assess the difference.  This might be a simpler thing to try, before the ducking reverb thing.

Greg

rocbryan, try this software in your listening room.  It can be used with a regular microphone, but I have the best luck with a small condenser omni or a decent spl meter.

https://www.roomeqwizard.com/

Check to see if there are significant room modes (usually something significant between 50-250Hz depending on how close the speakers are to the walls).  Most speakers should put out a "decent" range of lows, mids, and highs that are fairly even.  Cabinet designs even on lower-grade speakers are usually pretty good, and since you mention that you've tried at least 5 sets, it could be something to do with the space.

I found in my studio which is a tiny 10' x 10' or so space, the ceiling and open walls were the worst culprits of loss of sound.  I think I had room modes at 60hz and 120hz, which I fixed by building a cloud, using denim insulation between the speakers and corners of the room, 4" foam on the largest flat wall, and building isolators for my loudspeakers.  The cloud is stacks of wedged foam on an angled 1x2 rig wired to the ceiling, the isolators are 1'x1' floor tiles on several layers of hard foam insulation in a masonite tray, and the denim insulation is just in the bags it came in stuffed into some bookshelves.  It's not perfect, but the results are excellent considering that the price for everything, including a 24 band eq to further smooth the room modes, for well under $200 USD (about ten years ago).

While the frequencies I had trouble with were at the low end of the spectrum, those same modes can appear at 250hz, and 500hz, etc. depending on the angle and distance of your studio walls.  Also, make sure that you're not sitting in the center of the room, because all control rooms will be a little dead in that space, if you go into a professional control room, they won't be square, and the mix desk will sit about 1/3 from the wall on the longest side, and the couches or other seating will be at about 2/3 of the longest side of the room.  Also see if the distance between the speakers and the walls changes where the "hole" is in the sound.

Final thought, see if isolating any of the speakers helps.  Good stands or isolators tend to make any speaker sound cleaner because the desk, piano, table, shelf, or wall can absorb sound and then sympathetically vibrate at a different frequency than its absorbing--often in the bass or mids--which is a real problem, especially if they're resting on something made of wood.

In answer to Ra, here are two videos showing the TC6000 against VST/algorithmic reverbs, and any of the videos I've posted in the recordings area of the forum will have my reverb combo, like this one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pf1jxqQ8nxQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SM02GXXeHH0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ssKUKqGd-f8

Hi David,

glad and "sad" you agree.
I have  been trying to get a "wow" sound on speakers for quite some time and got lots of equipment for it. Again Pianoteq sounds really really very good through my headphones (Audio Technica ATH M50x). Super fun to play through headphones.

Since you have a CA97... on my CA98 the Bechstein sweet present with a little bass boost sounded not bad.
Not wow but quite o.k.
Maybe version 7 might bring some changes on speakers.

Happy playing

I could say I'm sad to read those last few posts too.

What I observe from an audio engineering/producer type perspective - there are levels to these things. User experiences and expectations are all over the place - and nobody knows whether the reader is on their wavelength.

That's why I often say I'm talking from experience, or frame it as an audio engineering perspective (or maybe I don't do that enough?).. but please forgive - I only have time to spit a few curt lines - hopefully deeper ideas can spring from those.. but here some timeless things...

I see and read words of at-home users of audio gear, or musicians at home spaces (not professional studios):

I see a piano against a wall. Like, tight up against it.

5 Inch speakers, are never going to make as good a sound as headphones.

Expensive headphones might sound OK - but no doubt, you can research what's in the top studios and make some personal judgement about whether those 'phones are worthwhile.

Even so, you might not like those - because they are "flat" frequency response "reference" 'phones. You have to know the difference - the "Why" in why would I use those?

Otherwise, you're confusing technical listening with "relaxing to the nicest sounds possible".

You buy big fat stereo loudspeakers to hear a real piano in your room (or minimum 8inc monitors).

Everything else, is like David Lynch says, "thinking you've watched a.. movie. On your ...**ing TELEPHONE - Get real!" It's not a lie.

There's a world of things we all can make better about our space, but I can't take seriously, "it sounds better" if I see a Kawai against a wall.

(I own an upright Kawai dpiano also - I back that thing out at least a metre or 2 or it's 1 dimensional - no wonder people have trouble hearing audio if they only play on these otherwise sweet babies, but astronomically prefer Pianoteq with my MP11 over no less than 8inch monitors).

Hope some of that gruff advice helps - seriously - not a judgemental thing - I do think a lot of people only have time, and some learning curves between themselves, and making great audio.

@davidizquierdo82,

I'd love your next years' Pianoteq competition video to blow minds with improved audio  - and everyone's to be honest - I know you can improve that audio! It's definitely newb stuff - don't be afraid to learn more -- reaching out to you to keep looking for ways to improve it.. it can be done - I'm 5 decades too long into these things - online here, it's impossible without visiting your studio space to really help much more than the things I've written here and in past posts, and all the other Pianoteq users also trying to help with so much of their time - but don't give up - that, to me, would be the saddest thing.

It's early days in my testing here but today I looked at speaker placement. I use some old Akai speakers (from an 80's boom box), they are 8 ohm and I really like their clarity, not great on bass but nothing a subwoofer can't solve. I was finding the treble overpowering but I still thought I could solve this. Eq was the obvious choice but wanted them flat responding. I then put each speaker at each far end of my VPC1, always figured the closer, almost in front of me would replicate headphones, but this wider placement has lowered the high frequencies in volume (as they are coming from further away) and now the mids are smooth and realistic. The panning is not affected by my movement when playing as much (way too obvious left to right before), similar to headphones now, but still 3D. Anyway this is day one on wide speaker placement for me and things are looking/sounding promising. P.s I use a Yamaha AV amp to power the speakers, no audio interface just Asio4all (totally happy there).

In Standard and Pro, you've got two choices: go for a standard stereo spec configuration (60 degree equilateral triangle which I use) or a forward-facing pair matched directly to the microphones virtual position and output channels perhaps with an added delay fx to simulate the depth of the piano (this is why most "player position" presets have delay turned on).  With the latter approach, you could create any configuration of speakers (one closer and one farther, or two together, or two five feet apart, or five speakers total in different positions throughout the room) but you would need very exacting control of microphone to speaker channel, which is only really possible in Standard/Pro.  While i haven't tested this, as long as your speakers match your microphone positions reasonably exactly, the sound they produce will be effective.

I know that the Yamaha Clavinova CVP-809 ($16K USD) functions on a similar principle along with a few other flagship digital pianos from Kurzweil or Kawai that either have soundboards and transducers or otherwise simulate being at a large piano by speakers placed where the hammers and soundboard should be.  I honestly have no idea how much these give good or gimmicky results, but I think you could easily create a solid DIY version of those ideas with PTQ.

After intense testing I have come to my conclusion, headphones for playing and speakers for playback. I wish there was a way to use speakers when playing but the compromise is too much, timing in my playing suffers with the speaker delay in sound. I wonder though, has anyone managed successfully to use the Bose Soundwear with Pianoteq?...just checked the Bose are not suitable, no line in just Bluetooth.

We need at least 88 speakers spread across a 4' x 8' resonant enclosure!

Excellent insights as always!

Oh, you exaggerate...All we really need is 40 pieces of highest-grade sprucewood joined with a little ribbing, a half-a-dozen to a dozen transducers, three sturdy wooden legs with gold casters, a serviceable/replaceable keyboard, a few pedals that don't move around, and one large curved speaker cabinet with an adjustable lid--preferably in a fine black enamel.

Splendid!  I'm thrilled you're getting better results.  In my small, almost "attic" studio (the same one as my profile picture shows), everyone who walks by seems to prefer the PTQ sound from outside the room.  While my setup really isn't bad, passersby always want to "hear the concert in the hallway" instead...

I think my subwoofer suggestion settings were a bit off in my last post, it seems best to start with nearly minimum volume and gradually increase until it matches the main speaker volume. As for the frequency, I am still working on the best setting. I have it today set less than the half way mark, it ranges from 80 to 160 hz so my guess is around 100hz?

Here's a good article on selecting crossover for any scenario:

https://www.svsound.com/blogs/svs/tips-...-subwoofer

On speakers, I did in recent days with Pianoteq & Organteq a test with old hi-fi equipment very heteroclyte downstream of my DAC Aun S6.
I used all around my Casio GP500 keyboard, simultaneously the following 3 systems: (all the speakers being placed less than 80cm from the player, to benefit from a proximity effect).
** Yahama A-500 amplifier 2x85w rms on 2 Triangle Maestro ES speakers, 2 ways Bass-reflex channels (including 16cm boomer and ogive tweeter) 91db / 1w / 1m (55-20000hz +/- 3db) +
** Pioneer A-119 amplifier 2x30w rms on 2 "vintage" Cabasse Sloop M4 speakers (output 94db / w / m) 3-way with 30cm boomers unfortunately for bass, in closed box, 10 cm medium and dome tweeter. (60-20000hz +/- 3db)
** Sony 2x70w rms digital amplifier (CMT-HX70BTR) 2-way bass reflex with 13cm fiberglass boomers and dome tweeter +
  2 x MartinLogan Grotto-i bass-reflex bass box (25.4cm boomer) on dedicated 300w rms amplifier each (22-120hz +/- 3db)
A Behringer parametric ultra curve equalizer DEQ2496, installed on the Yahama amplifier is configured
to try to balance a bit the subs and Triangle Maestro ES speakers, as tone contrôles are used on the 2 other amplifiers to limit low medium (sony) to rise treble and middle bass (Pioneer)

To test the audio performance of this system, I generated with Audacity tones between 16hz to 25khz at moderate level, reproduced by my DAC aune S6 at 96khz 32 bits, in order to be able to measure the result obtained (frequency response, phase shifts and distortion) with a pair of microphones at the position of the player's head, re-recording the reproduced sound.

The results obtained confirm my preference for using headphones to reproduce Pianoteq or Organteq as well as possible.

** Audio config with speakers: link: https://photos.app.goo.gl/z2hiXyhaerKX7kvZ9
** Test results at the player's head position (ORTF mics SE-8 match pair): link: https://photos.app.goo.gl/nA8mUgiwVbTX4Xqt5
(the results are for the whole system, mics included,  the result whas captured by an Audient id-14 interface at 96k 24bits)
** Mics position for tests: https://photos.app.goo.gl/Lf29jamm5M1tDAnh8  and  https://photos.app.goo.gl/PHn2g5JJx6o2QziKA

** Result audio system flac file: (703Mo 96k/24bits): http://dl.free.fr/kD0hoZlsh
** Original audio (before reproduction by speakers audio system): 96k/24bits, -8 db level flac file: http://dl.free.fr/kV0CQLto3

NB: On the audio file result, with Audacity, it is interesting to note at the very beginning of the generation of a new tone the appearance of a distortion (not measured here) which diminishes in the seconds which follow, especially on the frequencies very bass.

Bruno

Thank you for this link, edifying on the work to be done to balance the sound in a room of medium size ...

The performance of a headphones, even at moderate price, is indeed much better than that of a set of speakers, especially for distortion.
As an indication of what you can expect from a headphones (unfortunately I am not properly equipped to do the verification myself)
NB: other models are tested on this site.
HD600 (Sennheiser) link: https://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/i...2019.7499/
Thror (Kennerton) that i use for Pianoteq, link: https://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/i...ents.7072/

As the loudspeakers in our homes are among other victims of the misdeeds of Mr Schroeder (*), without headphones, no salvation  ...
... unless one day?, Pianoteq can allow us to draw the geometric shape of our room (in 3d) and offering sound absorption options for each surface, to offer an even more complete modeling of the rendering with speakers that it would be possible to place in this volume ...

Bruno

(*) link: https://brekkestrand.no/wp-content/uplo...isited.pdf
and: https://www.soundandvision.com/content/...ell-part-1

Good to see your progress MeDorian.

Depending on what we're trying to accomplish, it certainly helps to recognise things such as our own preconceptions about what we're 'supposed to do'.

Sometimes things outside the norm will work best for us and often, it takes looking at what 'the norms are' to discover something we think might help our own experience.

In these threads, plenty of people intermix ideas about:

a) piano-in-a-room, in the same way they may simultaneously speak of

b) 'recorded stereo piano' (like on an album)..

2 very different outcomes for the most part.

Without a super-long essay (just typing as I think - so hopefully it doesn't read back as having too much energy put in.. just ideas), I'm just going to post a list of reasons for Why I recommend 8inch monitors - mostly this relates to case 'b' above (recognising others are going to just fine with different speaker types). Just trying to take my own subjectivity out for a spin in this case.. it's not about re-creating a living piano in my space - or saying that's the goal.. it's about helping others who are embarking on a path towards recording and mixing their output for others to listen to on their wide ranges of devices. In a good studio, I still consider 8inch array as "the workhorse".. hopefully the reasons make sense below.

With 8inch monitors (Yamaha HS8 my pref.)

1
I can hear/feel enough bass (I just can't with lower sizes)

2
relating to that, there's less necessity to check mixes against other smaller and larger speakers, as I find from experience, 8inches = a great work-horse size.. what I mix on these I can have firm confidence in the output. I am at sea with smaller speakers, as well as just larger ones.. 8 really is the best for me, to get things right from the bottom to the top (only need to check on large speakers last - instead of piecemeal changing up and down the speaker size all the time - more productive in terms of "reference" therefore, if that's something of concern). You don't mix all day on the large speakers (although many will - I have experienced the down sides to that too - just be sure it's mentioned.. 8inch monitors is not just about being 'better' than smaller speakers, nor 'better' than large - just more efficient, more fully aware of the mix in ways which other sizes are not in my experience). One example: A studio I worked at I think early 80s had only tiny plus huge monitors.. I've seen the same mistake more than a few times.. all their work had midrange holes.. no labels or serious artists booked time.. they went to different studios.. it was YEARS too long before I realised why.. and 8inch monitors = though not a silver bullet, they are a great size for main workflow to take place.

3
less ear fatigue. This matters too, if you're main goal is mixing your recordings of Pianoteq. It's nice to hear everything on great large speakers but, even in a top tier studio setting, I like to hear things mostly on 8s. You can stay aware of all elements of the sound without being overwhelmed at all times with lavish bass and air (8s give this detail but subtly and in a way that you can hear/understand what/which you are pushing or limiting etc.. it's something which cannot be done as "quickly/easily/reliably" on other sizes IMO) - more than if you just used large monitors. I enjoy switching to the bigs for the Champagne experience in short bursts.. it's motivating and keeps the ears in a groove.. everyone is different for sure but I think this is 'sane' for esp. new audio mixers to suss out.

An example: my first engagement with a near top tier studio many decades back and some other lesser follow up studios, were hampered by a lack of mid sized speakers. Strangely their mixes had outrageous holes in the midrange - and likely because they did all mixing and monitoring, from start to finish, on super large speakers only checking momentarily on old transistor radio type speakers, from time to time, to hear what things might sound like on very small systems (yeah, mono AM radio was big back then, when we still wore onions on our belts and all that memery) .. and esp. these days, home stereos are mid to small compared - so these days even a better reason for 8s IMO). In a modern studio today, I think that describes something entirely cowboy and you'd likely find a bunch of different sized monitoring arrays to be able to check with at a switch.. but 8inch would still be my 90% of the time work-horse. In a way I'm happier doing most of this at home on 8s now. A full studio kit is still a whole hell of a thing to run.. compared to a PC and a small spend on our studio environment (competitive too - I'd hate to be on the hook like some of my friends for hundreds of thou just for a big studio 'brand' to sell clients.. but I'm not competing for those). Just to show that even outside a nice studio, I'll pick 8s.

4
from my experience, mixing things nicely in mids to upper (an area which can make or break a nice mix - as problematic as "mud" in most home demo stuff) is easier to just hear once and finally set on 8s.. again, on 5s or 3s or huge speakers, this can be entirely missing data.. just a personal perspective - not sure of what data is available out there but to me, the 8s allow me to hear a full picture and what I mix seems more often right (without fuss) on other systems with much less 'effort'. Think of a photographer, framing a photo on their fav camera.. they 'imagineer' the final framed item perhaps.. it's almost that blocked in for me with 8inch monitors.. I can sense "this is it" or not in a snap.

5
they allow JUST enough immersion, or what I think of relating to suspension of disbelief. (helpful for those "also" liking at least some of case 'a' above) I never hope to suggest 8inch monitors do this best.. of course, we can fill a stadium with audio, and a good front of house system can emulate a thousand pianos (in terms of volume).. but in our own space, we need to consider..

"What is my goal?" as much as "What is my budget?".

6
flat response, which includes most frequencies others will hear. Probably more essays required on this - but researchable online of course for anyone wanting the skinny.. why would a studio want flat response monitoring?

On the other hand, if wanting a sweet fat, full sound, and not concerned with mixing for others, it's probably better budget material to go with some large used stereo equipment with a nice valve amp or just through a nice old stereo set if not interested in tinkering - or a couple of larger speakers with and external audio unit).

For the most part, I'm speaking of home studio setup with most typical things from what we can accomplish with our PC/Pianoteq.

If no budget limits - either a full piano body with transducers - or some FOH (sorry, front of house like P.A. systems in a venue, from small to stadium) system with horns could be appropriate - but of course most users I think will be wanting to record at home and enjoy playing piano in their rooms.

Again, thus my 8inch recommendation - to me, this cuts the mustard here in both scenarios with no more to spend - and the ability to operate smoothly in both worlds - 2 birds with the one stone etc. I'd feel wrong to give people hope in searching for some magic 3inch speaker with hyped tech "bass boost extreme" with "side port" etc.. that is a mix of old and new tech perhaps, but have seen it all before and gave it up in the 80s - seriously nothing has made my ears happy since then, other than when I am sat before a pair of 8s (at least in terms of mixing for long periods or what I'd like at home for a studio in one size).

After so many decades kicking tyres in the audio space, I WISH someone would have given me this info in the 70s.. I did seem to have to work with a lot of horrible setups first, for this to make so much sense though.. so maybe we do all need to clunk around with our own ideas before such a simple thing as 8inch monitoring format finally makes sense to us.. or maybe I'm still subjective and projecting my own goals onto others.. but what else is a forum for, hoping these ideas can save others substantial time and money may mean more and better recordings into the world of music is my only goal here, not self promotion or selling some service.. just relating what I've found to be pretty darn solid over a long enough time-line to seem valid for others - the rest as they say, is up to us - and maybe your experiences will tally differently to mine (there are fewer and yet more rules as the world changes - but I still think 8inch platform is bees knees for the foreseeable

I could likely go on - but in most ways, the 8inch framework is more about being an appropriate budget home studio work horse, than being a piano-in-the-room.. but with smaller sizes, I can't enjoy any of these benefits listed..

Hope that's of further help to readers considering all these things.. it's really easy for me to say "I recommend this" without context - and I feel that maybe I've failed to add context to my recommendation of 8inch near-fields in the past. I guess I felt the need to establish that - not wanting to seem just to blurt out "8inch is best" without some basis to it. And I'm not arguing against anything counter BTW - and maybe I'm a minority in my love of the format for recording/mixing (headphones taking up only 5% for that - but I love those for just listening for enjoyment - to point out another difference which may not be peculiar to others).

None of this post about speakers gets into issues around room acoustics, or which sample rates etc. and how various other things in the chain which we use can make a difference (and if our DAC is killing our detail in various ways etc.)

In some sense, someone at home with Pianoteq and a PC has some choices ahead.. and if the goal is recording, then do consider 8inch near-field monitors as I do believe my own hype above.. but also, look at your room acoustics and you'll certainly have research to do at least online.. and you'll want to try various things to liven or dampen things with baffles or foam or egg cartons or etc.. again though, each to their own.. and sometimes, just a nice pair of near-fields is enough because:

Another nice thing about 8inch near-fields is that you can become rationally accustomed to them fairly close up to our ears (feeling that whole stereo environment fairly closely when working - and sit back further when listening for enjoyment), so as to lessen the problems of your own acoustic space esp. when working.. bada bing, bada boom. I can't experience that same equiv scenario with 5 or 3, therefore cannot recommend that size.

Also, BTW - all this is primarily in terms of 'improving our audio output' (so readers new to 'recording our own music' could be in for some learning curves beyond what speakers might be good to try) - BUT if we stick with Pianoteq defaults, probably not so much of this matters.. again, also just noting (in case skipped up top) I'm talking primarily about reliably outputting our audio with the 'b' case scenario in mind..

Anyone in the 'a' case scenario could find way more room to move in terms of speaker types, arrangement and so on. (not mentioning that transducers in a piano body probably wins this case for now).

And like others say, definitely enjoy reading everyone's ideas and concepts - and agree with others who have said it, what a fabulous community this is.

Best of luck y'all!

Nice post Qexl! This is what I meant by sharing our various backgrounds...

Yes, headphones can be fatiguing. I know our friend Piet de Ridder said he never uses headphones for mixing (or any time I'm not sure) maybe to protect his hearing. I would be curious to know what speakers he uses in his studio.

I never tried any, but I guess small near-field monitors are the best of both worlds since you put them close to you and so minimize room interaction. I suppose large monitors have to be put further away and so are more affected.

My past experience with speakers have been with spare hifi monitors (a pair of Paradigm Mini-monitors and also an old pair of Dynaco A10 in a small room) and the result was disappointing. I must say also that the church ambiance that is so very well rendered in Organteq really needs headphones to be appreciated while Pianoteq can sound more realistic with speakers if one uses Player-type presets with very little reverb but proper volume.

I once played back a recording of an Organteq piece on my hifi setup in another (larger) room and while I was now getting all the powerful bass, most of the reverb was lost...I mean the reverb was there but I was in my living room listening to an organ recording not in the church playing the organ as with headphones. The living room reverb is all around me not the church's.

Tried some different (JVC) surround type speakers today, although they had better fidelity, tweeters were a problem. Crosstalk is something I have taken for granted lately having no problems with single drivers, seems like I've been 'burning bridges' audio wise, doesn't seem like any way back to a 'normal' setup. The Sony surround speakers (my preference) are far from perfect, some higher mids and most of the top octave is lacking in quality due to not having tweeters, but I can live with this until I find 'high end' small single driver speakers to replace these. The thing is, this system feels much more natural than my previous setups.