Pianoteq 4 impressions!. (Page 2 of 5)

Hey Modartt...  I think it's time to update the sound test comparison of V-Piano X pianoteq.

Now Evil Dragon's quote:  "V-piano can s.... it"   makes more sense.

I have a sugestion:  A second Hibryd preset, a bit more pushed to organ.
 
The actual hybrid it's very good, very charming, and more natural than the last hybrid of V-3.  I think many people will like it even more with a second hybrid, pushed a bit more to organ.

The Honk Tonk now sounds more realistic, and makes me think that perhaps pianoteq technology it's ready to try a upright piano model.

Funny,...  year ago I gave a suggestion to Modartt, more to the funny side...  I said it would be interesting to have a crap piano ( a model simulating a very worm, out tune, aged, terrible condition piano), to remamber about the difference to have a great tuned piano.
And now Modart added the Ruined piano,a preset choice in V4.  And sounds very  realistic too.  I supose they remambered my suggestion from years ago.   

Nous n'avons pas de pétrole, nous n'avons pas Obama, mais nous avons Phillippe Guillaume /Pianoteq ... Cocorico!

Thinking the same thing...

Registered today and first post just to trash the product. Very original.

Hi,

Have just registered and this is my first post. Please take this as an honest question and not as an attack on the product.

I find it wonderfully expressive. It sings and breaths better then anything else out there. However I can't to grips with the actual sound. Not the Attack, decay or anything like that but the actual content of the sound. I went to Kramsters YouTube link on the first page and my first impression was metallic almost like a child's toy piano.

I downloaded the demo. I am using a Korg M3 88 as my controller and listening through KRK monitors. I also have a Bluthner grand piano. If a play a chord on the grand, then on my M3 with the Irish acts grand piano and I listen to the sound both have a warmth and texture to them. Obviously the real grand sounds better but the chord
played on the M3 sounds like a recording of a real piano. This M3 piano is however not nearly as expressive as pianoteq.

I then play the same chord trying several presets on pianoteq. There is just something about the sound, it's an almost piano but not quite the real thing, like a piano crafted out of metal and all the wood removed. Does that make sense? Am I missing something?

Yes I think so, I feel the same way and I use the software since V2. It's a living, breathing and singing instrument and sometimes reminds me at a piano but I think I'm too conditioned to a real piano sound, that it fades from being impressed to being  irritated by the sound.
My actual favorite is the D4 Duo preset with the church hall. It is a really excellent playable instrument but I have to forget about playing a real piano. Also depending on the hearing conditions. Don't like it with headphones at all, don't like it with my phase coherent studio monitors (coincident speakers) but it works fine on my 49€ JBL PC speakers. Funny? I think parameterizing the world doesn't create reality so easily but PTQ is very close  to fool the ear brain system and that's all about "good sound" in the "audio-game". But that never worked for all people the same way. Maybe  someday we will be perfectly "fooled" by PTQ then we will be happy with that "real" piano out of the computer. 
I'm sadly not perfectly fooled by version 4, but it alternates now a little more so that I can play on one day for some hours and I'm happy with it.

Metalic toy piano is harsh. What I'm trying to get across is that I heard a certain quality on the YouTube clip that reminds me of the toy piano, but obviously it doesn't sound like one.

I haven't played with parameters like hammer hardness etc. I'll do that tonight, maybe EQ the sound etc.

I really want this to work. Software like ivory sounds great but it plays so badly compared to a real piano. If I can get a sound I like out of pianoteq I will be over the moon :-)

Undoubtedly. But given the different physical construction of an upright, I suspect this would require a significant rewrite of the abstract model of a grand.

I guess that Modartt have thought about the possibility of faking an upright by substituting different internal parameter values into their computer model of a grand. And I guess further that if they have tried it, they were none too happy about  putting their name to the result ;-)

They've actually already written one, apparently it got as far as beta testing a few years back but they weren't happy with it so it was withdrawn.

Hi all,

This is my first post.

I am an intermediate level pianist, music student and student of the history of the piano and the various aspects of its development.

I purchased Pianoteq Play 3.67 last year around September 2011, then I purchased the upgrade to Pianoteq Standard a couple weeks later. I was impressed by Pianoteq 3.67 very pleased with the sound and the promise it held. I would always read the reviews in the different forums about the sound of Pianoteq, and the valid concerns/critiques of the various contributors, but I always felt that Pianoteq stood on its own as an instrument in its own right, so some days I would play/practice with my sample libraries and other days only Pianoteq according to my mood.

Upon release of V 4.0 I upgraded. Wow!! So I immediately purchased an upgrade to Pianoteq Pro 4.0.

The sound of Pianoteq now evokes a visceral response within me that I would usually get from hearing an acoustic performance (live or otherwise).

I now feel no need to go to my sample libraries anymore. Thank you Professor Philippe Guillaume, Thank you Modartt and the team of advisors, consultants and testers that made this possible.

I would like to also complement Modartt and the design team on the very intuitive and well organised layout of the website. The sense of ecosystem, information, community, support, demos, trials, forums and its presentation; are without equal in the piano VST world IMHO .  The sampled library websites do not approach this level of support and organisation. This aspect is vital to the products' success.

Bravo Modartt.

Quote .. I love modartt

Well, this is after all a "user forum", not a " bow down and praise the heavens for Pianoteq forum", so why so sarcastic over a single negative comment? Many over at Pianoworldforums dislike Pianoteq, and bash it passionately, and that's perfectly fine. The way I see it, is that if Pianoteq was as good sounding and customizable as all the hype on these forums make it out to be (and don't get me wrong, I like the sound and do think it sounds very good for the most part), then it would be the be all end all piano solution and nobody would talk about Ivory, Vintage D and all the other samplers out there, but because it's not, it's not. I still think Pianoteq D4 sounds strongly like Pianoteq (a synthetic, metallic piano model), as opposed to a grand piano.

One thing to bear in mind is that piano sounds are incredibly personal.  I rarely like the presets for my own music, but mainly because they are not exactly my style of piano.  I know exactly what I like, and so I tweak the closest preset until I get it.  One example, I generally prefer a piano to ring out/resonate more.

If you check out the PT4 audio demos on the site, you'll see what the D4 instrument is capable of.  And also check out the Workshops, for example matching the D4 to the Beatle's 'Let it Be' piano - very close match, and a good introduction to tweaking the parameters to get what you want.

Also the velocity curve is absolutely crucial to getting the right feel when playing live.  If the demos sound convincing to you, but playing doesn't, that's the first thing you need to look at.  The wrong curve for your particular keyboard just doesn't respond the way a piano does and ruins the realism.

The other thing to remember is that PT is simulating a recorded piano, not a live one.  Recording with mics is incredibly hard, as you know if you've ever experimented with PT's virtual mics placement - the smallest movement can drastically change the sound.  And it also matters if the mic is close to the strings, or below the piano etc.

So I would encourage anyone with the Standard or Pro editions to spend some time with the microphones at least, even if you don't want to get too involved with the other parameters.  You may find that a few mic tweaks get you much closer to the sound you're after.

Click on effects (bottom right) and then click on where it says NONE in the effects window. You'll get a drop down list and second from the bottom is amp.

I may have confused matters by writing "(tube) amp." It's an amplifier, and is thus called "amp" but you can use it to emulate the sound of a tube amp by manipulating the freqs and raising the distortion a bit.

I guess EvilDragon is among the fan boys who feel a need to defend. Or to jump to the conclusion that "newbies" to the forum don't have valid opinions (which is nonsense). Or that I am a newbie here (also false).

I first came here some years ago when v2 was new. I was eager to try because my old computer couldn't possibly handle a sampled piano library. (It was at that time about seven years old: inadequate CPU, inadequate and slow storage.) But it handled Pianoteq easily.

The prospects were bright, but I just couldn't tolerate the sound of v2. So after posting here for a bit, I dropped out. (I only re-registered the other day because I could not find my old account name/password.)

So I let things sit for a while, and finally v3 came out. Clearly better. (How could it not be?) But still not acceptable.

I finally got a computer capable of supporting piano libraries and I was delighted first by Ivory 1.5 (though it lacks half-pedaling). To solve the half-pedal I thought I'd try Ivory 2. But on a strong recommendation I tried Galaxy Vintage D. (I also tried Galaxy Steinway, and Galaxy Vienna Grand.)

I very much like the Vintage D. It's my primary, used 90% of the time.
I didn't like the Steinway much.
I find the Vienna somewhere in between (good for some music, not for some other).

I've also tried TruePianos ... horrible!
Alicias Keys ... odd sounding, probably meant for pop music, not for me.
Old Black Grand ... usable, but not to my taste.
Imperfect Samples Fazioli ... quite nice.

Then (this week) came Pianoteq v4. After previous rounds of dashed expectation, I wasn't too hopeful. But Pianoteq is smart about demos: Free to try, and very easy to try.

So, yes, in v4 they've addressed some of the long-standing problems. But it still sounds unlike any acoustic piano I've ever used. Disappointment.

So I'm wondering what is it about Pianoteq that some love and some hate?
Among people who like Pianoteq ...
- Are they more accustomed than I to synthetic sounds?
- Or do they have a preference for pop piano over classical (and perhaps Pianoteq fits pop better classical)?
- Or something else?

My setup is the same, and so is my reaction.  Thanks Modartt for a great release!  The new D4 is very nice.  I have a Steinway A across the room, and I find the Pianoteq instrument delightful.  I use it playing live, in a band setting, and for composing, and it sounds fantastic.  It is WAY better than mic'ing a piano, and the VAX is a great controller for it.  I had been quite happy with a tweaked version of the K1, and the D4 sounds great.   I think it is wonderful that my virtual piano just got better for a <1 min download!  It takes a long time to tune the "A" by comparison!  I am a very happy customer, and thrilled that I got v4 for "free" due to my purchasing last year.  Thank you for a generous upgrade program.

K1, M3 and C3 are also updated. Not sure about EPs, I don't think they are.

The binaural mic option seems to have improved and is definitely what I prefer using now when listening through headphones. A little fine tuning of the head size is required for the optimal effect.

Overemphasized cabinet... I think that is a good description of the problem I personally have with Pianoteq3. Somehow not when listening to the demos, but when trying to play myself. (And I admit headphones make it just worse.) That is also what made me think most sampled pianos sounded somehow "more realistic" (=cleaner, not so much crazily boosted / buzzy...) than PT since the beginning. Still I have bought PT PLAY (the dynamic response is just awesome!) and I got (a bit) more used to the sound after a while. But often I had to turn down the volume and turn-off different features (reverberation, action,...) to get rid of the feeling that my head is closed inside the (closed!) piano cabinet, when playing with any velocity in the upper half.

(Sorry, I have not tried PT4 in real since there is no PLAY version, yet.)

And one more thing generally considering the "belly" sound discussion: do not ask the people who don't like the sound to send you a demo of "what they hear wrong". The difference is not in the sound but in the brain. They hear the same sound as you do - they just do not like it (possibly they are sensitive to some aspect that your brain ignores or even likes). It is the same thing as with pictures, shapes, colors and art generally: one may love what the other one hates.

v3.ptq is the file you need for C3/M3. K1 is built-in.

Nope, I never had Pianoteq 1 to begin with... I'm a v3 adopter.

I found you...

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