Topic by dikrek

  • Avatar
  • dikrek
  • Member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 06-02-2023
  • Posts: 181

Topic: Tuning assistance appreciated for 280VC

Hi all - was chatting with David Lai over at the Pianoclack forum. He's one of those people to whom Pianoteq sounds metallic and artificial.

Here's his video - great performance: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZTgDvFS-uk

He gave me the MIDI file and we settled on the 280VC bothering him the least.

Here's the Dropbox folder: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/l2pft4ez...d&dl=0

Therein you'll find the FLAC file for the Pianoteq rendition and the preset file I made to get it.

In case anyone likes how it sounds. We arrived at this version after some back-and-forth of feedback.

I also put in the "vanilla" preset rendition so you hear the difference, then another one with lowered duplex resonance.

Let me know what you think.

He still thinks it sounds harsh and artificial at the higher registers, I've already lowered hammer hardness etc.

Any suggestions? I have PTQ STD 9.

Reply by daniel_r328

  • Avatar
  • daniel_r328
  • Member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 27-07-2025
  • Posts: 64

Re: Tuning assistance appreciated for 280VC

Heya, I haven't looked at the preset in detail, but as a general idea have you made any microphone substitutions? The SF12 for close, R84 for distant (while an unconventional arrangement) is a lot warmer than the normal set ups. You can even boost the relative delay between left and right by a few ms for extra smoothing.

I'm basing this off my theory that the people who feel Pianoteq sounds synthetic get this from the pickup being too clean

Last edited by daniel_r328 (22-10-2025 08:44)

Reply by dikrek

  • Avatar
  • dikrek
  • Member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 06-02-2023
  • Posts: 181

Re: Tuning assistance appreciated for 280VC

daniel_r328 wrote:

Heya, I haven't looked at the preset in detail, but as a general idea have you made any microphone substitutions? The SF12 for close, R84 for distant (while an unconventional arrangement) is a lot warmer than the normal set ups. You can even boost the relative delay between left and right by a few ms for extra smoothing.

I'm basing this off my theory that the people who feel Pianoteq sounds synthetic get this from the pickup being too clean

Thanks, haven’t tried that. Check the examples though - I did renderings with my preset plus a few other modified ones.

Reply by Amen Ptah Ra

  • Avatar
  • Amen Ptah Ra
  • Member
  • Offline
  • From: Los Angeles, California
  • Registered: 12-05-2017
  • Posts: 1,822

Re: Tuning assistance appreciated for 280VC

daniel_r328 wrote:

Heya, I haven't looked at the preset in detail, but as a general idea have you made any microphone substitutions? The SF12 for close, R84 for distant (while an unconventional arrangement) is a lot warmer than the normal set ups. You can even boost the relative delay between left and right by a few ms for extra smoothing.

I'm basing this off my theory that the people who feel Pianoteq sounds synthetic get this from the pickup being too clean

You're possibly onto something, daniel_r328.  A microphone as perfect as a PIANOTEQ Perfect Omni mic having no distortion happens to exist nowhere outside its own virtual space.  About any of the other types of microphones whether virtual or the physical, especially since the latter were used to record the sample libraries with lots of color they add in high frequencies, people likely had been accustomed to hear their piano recordings —sampled and other— produced more out of the color than out of innovation (that is) a distortion free and seemingly colorless virtual microphone.  Such modern innovation MODARTT brings to people, new producers and musicians alike  —but who are resistant to change!

You do realize outside PIANOTEQ few individuals get to sit at not just one but an extremely large assortment of brand new pristine pianos costing upwards of $80,000 each approximately and get also to convey er report back to you on exactly what they heard respectfully from each key of every instrument played inside either old world or recently constructed European concert halls!  (Few from their own experiences are in any real position today to tell you, what you should expect to hear if —or whenever— seated at a piano bench and you're about to render (however highly anticipated) a concert from your own repertoire.)

Honestly ever since digital became a thing widely accepted to music producing, people have gotten their own various methods —some at high prices and others given to them— to deal with just whatever they deem digitally still too harsh and specifically in high frequencies...

Your suggestion of ribbon mics I myself just got to try out now.

Thank you!

Last edited by Amen Ptah Ra (22-10-2025 18:30)
Pianoteq 8 Studio Bundle, Pearl malletSTATION EM1, Roland (DRUM SOUND MODULE TD-30, HandSonic 10, AX-1), Akai EWI USB, Yamaha DIGITAL PIANO P-95, M-Audio STUDIOPHILE BX5, Focusrite Saffire PRO 24 DSP.

Reply by daniel_r328

  • Avatar
  • daniel_r328
  • Member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 27-07-2025
  • Posts: 64

Re: Tuning assistance appreciated for 280VC

Thinking about it... I wonder what David would make of the new Sombre presets. Those sound much more mastered to me than the other presets, so someone with a preference for sampled pianos might find these preferable!

Reply by dikrek

  • Avatar
  • dikrek
  • Member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 06-02-2023
  • Posts: 181

Re: Tuning assistance appreciated for 280VC

daniel_r328 wrote:

Thinking about it... I wonder what David would make of the new Sombre presets. Those sound much more mastered to me than the other presets, so someone with a preference for sampled pianos might find these preferable!

He can't stand notes above G5 even with the Sombre presets. We went back and forth a lot. If you have time to check the samples in the dropbox folder I sent it would be cool.

Reply by jsaras

  • Avatar
  • jsaras
  • Member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 05-05-2011
  • Posts: 17

Re: Tuning assistance appreciated for 280VC

I'm not thrilled with the smiley-scooped EQ of the piano in the video. This preset is not a clone per se. I think it's better than the VI Modern Labs Steinway. https://forum.modartt.com/file/71d2z7uo

Reply by secretfirefox

  • Avatar
  • secretfirefox
  • Member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 13-08-2024
  • Posts: 8

Re: Tuning assistance appreciated for 280VC

Hi! I wanted to give this a try. Let me know how well you like it against the Modern D.

https://forum.modartt.com/file/1k1zptkl

Cheers!

edit: please set sound speed to 340 m/s manually. I couldn't get it to save it on the preset for some reason.

Last edited by secretfirefox (23-10-2025 03:13)

Reply by daniel_r328

  • Avatar
  • daniel_r328
  • Member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 27-07-2025
  • Posts: 64

Re: Tuning assistance appreciated for 280VC

dikrek wrote:

He can't stand notes above G5 even with the Sombre presets. We went back and forth a lot. If you have time to check the samples in the dropbox folder I sent it would be cool.

Hmm the modern D is easier listening, but I don't think it's down to piano design, but production effects - it sounds more compressed and EQd, and has a more sophisticated/saturated room reverb, for starters. I mean to say the pianoteq renderings sound more like raw takes off the mic, and the Modern D one sounds mastered. (Some probably prefer if they sound like a CD, but I want to stay close to the experience of playing a real acoustic, so raw is good for me.)

My choice of instrument (even within pianoteq) alters how I play quite a lot, so usually a midi based off one instrument will sound best with that instrument. I imagine the same is the case with the modern D, whose different velocity levels seem more forgiving than pianoteq (or a real instrument). You'd probably want to remap velocities per-register to have the new instrument be played "correctly".

That said I for one prefer the humanised Bosi for active listening - the interpretation comes across more clearly. The Modern D for above reasons makes it sound like a better interpretation.


(idle ramble) I've heard the argument that pianoteq is better for playing, and samples are better for production. I'm not a music producer so can't comment but just by analogy, surely music producers would prefer to work with a "raw" recording sound than something that's premixed? (/idle ramble)

Last edited by daniel_r328 (23-10-2025 08:57)

Reply by dikrek

  • Avatar
  • dikrek
  • Member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 06-02-2023
  • Posts: 181

Re: Tuning assistance appreciated for 280VC

daniel_r328 wrote:
dikrek wrote:

He can't stand notes above G5 even with the Sombre presets. We went back and forth a lot. If you have time to check the samples in the dropbox folder I sent it would be cool.

Hmm the modern D is easier listening, but I don't think it's down to piano design, but production effects - it sounds more compressed and EQd, and has a more sophisticated/saturated room reverb, for starters. I mean to say the pianoteq renderings sound more like raw takes off the mic, and the Modern D one sounds mastered. (Some probably prefer if they sound like a CD, but I want to stay close to the experience of playing a real acoustic, so raw is good for me.)

My choice of instrument (even within pianoteq) alters how I play quite a lot, so usually a midi based off one instrument will sound best with that instrument. I imagine the same is the case with the modern D, whose different velocity levels seem more forgiving than pianoteq (or a real instrument). You'd probably want to remap velocities per-register to have the new instrument be played "correctly".

That said I for one prefer the humanised Bosi for active listening - the interpretation comes across more clearly. The Modern D for above reasons makes it sound like a better interpretation.


(idle ramble) I've heard the argument that pianoteq is better for playing, and samples are better for production. I'm not a music producer so can't comment but just by analogy, surely music producers would prefer to work with a "raw" recording sound than something that's premixed? (/idle ramble)

Agreed, he may also be using a custom velocity curve that we just don’t have. I have another folder in the share (TheRest) where I tried with other models and he hated all of them.

Reply by dikrek

  • Avatar
  • dikrek
  • Member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 06-02-2023
  • Posts: 181

Re: Tuning assistance appreciated for 280VC

daniel_r328 wrote:
dikrek wrote:

He can't stand notes above G5 even with the Sombre presets. We went back and forth a lot. If you have time to check the samples in the dropbox folder I sent it would be cool.

Hmm the modern D is easier listening, but I don't think it's down to piano design, but production effects - it sounds more compressed and EQd, and has a more sophisticated/saturated room reverb, for starters. I mean to say the pianoteq renderings sound more like raw takes off the mic, and the Modern D one sounds mastered. (Some probably prefer if they sound like a CD, but I want to stay close to the experience of playing a real acoustic, so raw is good for me.)

My choice of instrument (even within pianoteq) alters how I play quite a lot, so usually a midi based off one instrument will sound best with that instrument. I imagine the same is the case with the modern D, whose different velocity levels seem more forgiving than pianoteq (or a real instrument). You'd probably want to remap velocities per-register to have the new instrument be played "correctly".

That said I for one prefer the humanised Bosi for active listening - the interpretation comes across more clearly. The Modern D for above reasons makes it sound like a better interpretation.


(idle ramble) I've heard the argument that pianoteq is better for playing, and samples are better for production. I'm not a music producer so can't comment but just by analogy, surely music producers would prefer to work with a "raw" recording sound than something that's premixed? (/idle ramble)

I have a file with external FX instead, check it out (did it in my DAW)

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/4lf39zw0...l&dl=0

Reply by daniel_r328

  • Avatar
  • daniel_r328
  • Member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 27-07-2025
  • Posts: 64

Re: Tuning assistance appreciated for 280VC

dikrek wrote:

I have a file with external FX instead, check it out (did it in my DAW)

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/4lf39zw0...l&dl=0

Yeah that sounds a lot closer to a sample library, at least to my ear. What do you think?

Reply by dikrek

  • Avatar
  • dikrek
  • Member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 06-02-2023
  • Posts: 181

Re: Tuning assistance appreciated for 280VC

daniel_r328 wrote:
dikrek wrote:

I have a file with external FX instead, check it out (did it in my DAW)

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/4lf39zw0...l&dl=0

Yeah that sounds a lot closer to a sample library, at least to my ear. What do you think?

He hated even that one!

To me it sounds good but I’m not a concert pianist.