PC/Speaker/Hardware/Etc. Setup for Pianoteq?

I would disagree here... If you want to do some mixing, make yourself a favor: buy a (decent) pair of studio monitors. While the Bose may be very pleasant to listen to, they will not tell you the real sound of your recording, noticeably the real stereo image: the Bose system is designed to enhance it artificially with their "TrueSpace surround digital processing circuitry". Pleasant but not accurate, and neither the "arc" neither the "ergo" will be able to correct this. For about the same price as both systems, you can get a decent pair of studio monitors.
You could still enjoy the Bose for your CD's however.

yes, when I write "a pair of monitors", you can add a sub, of course, it depends mostly of the size of the monitor's woofers. But not always: when I'm recording out of my studio (where I have 3 different systems!) , I use a pair of small Focal CMS50 and their low end is really impressive for their size, but OK, they are not the cheapest you can find ! ;-)

For listening ... yes, hi-fi speakers would be better than monitors.

Hi-fi speakers and monitors are just different, that's all there is to it. Different speakers for different purposes. If you're recording and mixing, hi-fi is out of question.

I have 2 setups... Casio PX-330 into Presonus 44VSL into Mac Book Pro 15 back to Presonus and out to M-Audio BX8a's and a KR 10 Sub.

Other is GEM pRP7 into MOTU Ultralite to iMac 27 nearly maxed out and back to MOTU into a stereo receiver to a couple  old KLH 900Bs and a big ole KLH sub.

The 1st setup sounds way better right in front for sure.

The 1st setup sounds even better when I switch the interfaces (MOTU and Presonus)

Hello All,

If I may be allowed to recall a quip made on "The Benny Hill Show" television program of a few decades ago:

Benny Hill stated,  "May I be frank?  I'll be honest if you prefer."

I think of hi-fi type speakers as being "frank" -- although, in doing so, they may artificially increase the upper bass, or perhaps enhance (or taper) the high frequencies, etc., etc.  The point with hi-fi type speakers ... is to sound good enough (for any given price point) that they will "outshine" their similarly priced competition in the store ... and will hopefully be carried home from the store in preference to other speakers being left sitting on the shelves.

I think of monitor type speakers as being more "honest" in converting the electrical input signal to an audio (sound) output.  The idea of monitors (in a recording studio situation) is to "reveal" defects in the sound, if they are present in the recording.  The logic for this is to allow the master recording engineer to correct such recording defects prior to releasing the recording for consumers' use.

Restated, if a recording sounds good in a pair of quality monitors, then the odds are the recording will sound good-to-great in a large number of consumer applications (hi-fi systems, car systems, CD clock radios, etc.).

The reverse is not guaranteed to be true:  If one masters a recording to sound good with a particular pair of hi-fi type speakers, then it is a "coin toss" as to whether it sounds good with other brands of competitive hi-fi systems.  For example, if you master your recording with a pair of hi-fi type speakers that extraordinarily accentuate the upper bass, then your recording will probably sound "thin" when played on higher quality speakers.  Or, if one masters a recording via a pair of hi-fi speakers whose bass is lacking, or midrange, etc, is lacking, ... then odds are that the recording will sound bass heavy, muddy, or even high frequency screechy on other consumer systems.

I apologize for being so long winded, but I tend to type in the manner that I speak.  Hopefully you have read this far.

Cheers,

Joe

Hello Mr. Mabry,

In my own case, I do my mastering through a pair of AKG-702 headphones.  I am aware these 'phones are slightly shy in bass response, so I specifically do not attempt to "overly correct" the bass in the mix.  Otherwise, the AKG-702's are extremely revealing of audio details I might otherwise miss in lesser-quality 'phones.  Previous experience with other headphones and non-monitor type loudspeakers has caused me to produce CD recordings whose bass responses sounded muddy, and generally too heavy when played through high quality consumer audio systems.

Now, the real reason I do not master my recordings with good monitor speakers ... is that the high audio levels required to do mastering does not sit well with my wife (34th wedding anniversary on 28MAY2012).  This is especially true when I loop portions of the audio while searching for the best reverb, or EQ setting -- it becomes extremely annoying for someone in the same house if I master my recordings through speakers.

Next, I test my recordings in my car-audio, especially to listen whether the audio becomes masked by the effects of ambient wind noise while driving.  Other tests include playing back through a pair of Bose QC-2 headphones (very bass heavy -- and relatively light in the upper frequencies), and a cheap pair of older Sennheiser 'phones.  I also run test CDs through my digital alarm clock, just to listen to how the sound holds up with devices that sport miniature speakers.

My personal "acid test" involves running my Pianoteq recordings through my aging audiophile system, which consists of 6 channel audio played through Ohm-F speakers, Ohm Walsh-4 speakers, and some B&W small monitors, of which the latter pair is wall mounted towards my back and lifted to just below ceiling level.  All of these speakers are played through three dedicated stereo amps whose summed wattage is 4.4 kilowatts distributed among six speakers.  My holy grail of sound is to mentally visualize a Steinway Model D in my living room while listening to Pianoteq D4.  Sometimes it happens, in which case I forget I am listening to Pianoteq, and just listen to the music.
(With all of this racket in the house, does anyone question why my wife insists that I use headphones?????)

Although I am drifting off topic at this moment, it is because of the logarithmic property of non-clipped audio output signal that I require such high powered amplifiers.  You see, for every increase of 3dB in sound output, the amplifiers' outputs are doubled!  Adding another +3dB corresponds to yet another doubling of amplifier power.  It is hard to conceive that reproducing a +30dB increase involves 10 "redoublings" of amplifier power -- a factor of 1024 times!!!

Personally speaking, in order to reproduce the in-room dynamics of a grand piano, I make use of all 4,400 watts sent to my six speakers -- if there is to be audio without clipping!  One of the reasons I believe that people complain about Pianoteq sounding "metallic" is that their amplifiers are running out of headroom, and are clipping and/or their speakers are distorting!!!  After all, WHO can expect a pair of cone speakers (whose surface areas are measured in terms of square inches or centimeters) to reproduce the grandeur of a 9' piano's 20+ square feet's worth of soundboard area, connected via the bridge to some 230+ strings, carrying a tension of more than 20 or 25 tons?????

Cheers,

Joe

Just a idea...

Fo who have the flat response studio monitor, maybe they get a "too perfect" sound for the electric pianos ad ons, cause the original instruments are from many decades ago and used speakers far from que high quality of today.

What do you think about a option to emulate the sound response of the vintage speakers of such instruments?

More seriously joe, I agree with you that a huge amount of power is needed as headroom for clean, fully realistic dynamic reproduction of a grand piano, although this is dependent also on room size (wall reflections are an important factor). I have a rather large listening room, but I think that if I would place a real Steinway D in there, it would just be too loud! In the past I owned a large Kawai upright that was just too loud for me (in a smaller room elsewhere though) so I was tempted to keep riding the soft pedal all the time...but maybe this is worse for uprights where the player is closer to the soundboard that is somewhat reinforced by the wall in the back.

I have an audio system with a 15" servo-controlled sub with its own 250W amp, plus a 60W/channel stereo amp driving full range B&Ws, plus another 60W/channel stereo amp driving smaller Paradigm bookshelfs in the back, for a total of 490W RMS giving me very satisfactory sound from CDs or SACDs, but I am sure the sound is not as loud as would be a real piano, it is just scaled down correctly so the illusion is still quite valid.

In the same way, high-quality headphones are the best (and cheapest) way of having that "illusion" of a real instrument or instruments. The only danger in that case is overdoing it, and damaging our ears...

I don't own studio monitors or speakers designed for public performance, but those I heard seem to produce that "metallic" coloration, which is maybe one of the possible source of that criticism. In other words, I think a realistic full dynamics piano sound is surely possible in a listening room with hi-fi speakers AND the high headroom of high quality amps, but I think that this is not scalable for a large concert hall or other public performance room. Even 4.4kW is not enough, as you say, the power must be much higher, but then you have to use very colored speakers, not hi-fi at all, to absorb all that energy without blowing up...

Very true, Luc

Please do remember that the same loudness for speakers requiring 100 or 1000 watts follows the logarithmic +3dB rule:  When one wishes to increase that reference loudness by only 3dB, the power amplification must be doubled -- 200 or 2000 watts.

An increase of +3dB is quite subtle ... if one has a monophonic source, and plays it through the left channel alone -- and then adds the sound from the right channel, ... the amplification has doubled, but one senses only a slight difference in loudness.

I agree that we listen to decibels, but clean decibels require tons of RMS power.

Cheers,

Joe

<Edited only for grammatical accuracy.>

No, monitors are usually more efficient: hifi speakers typically deliver around 85-86 dB at 1W/1m, similar sized monitors are often close to 90 dB. Most hifi speakers also exhibit a flattering low-end (and often hi-end as well), wich is also related to their lower efficiency.
But this becomes less obvious now that most monitors are internally (bi-)amplified. Wich is also (much) better by the way: less distorsion, less phase problems, and a best amp-speakers matching.

Of course, the Bose L1 is another kind of beast !  Exactly like hifi speakers versus monitors... Tailored for other purposes.
BTW, I just had yesterday (yes !) an experience of a (very, very, very good!) pianist who didn't like my mastering of his recording of Liszt pieces on his own hifi system... Then he listened to the same CD on other (more or less comparable) systems and fully agreed about my mastering job!
Guess what? He has a Bose system... Really. Hum... ;-)

I have 2 Bose Compacts and 2 T1s to go with them... very good indeed for smaller areas... would like a wee more bass punch though