pro version out!!!!!! (Page 1 of 2)

Note-by-note adjustability of 22 parameters. Except the ONE that I need, and have been practically begging for since last year. (Per-note adjustability of MIDI velocity response.)

The good news is, this upgrade convinces me that implementing per-note adjustability of MIDI velocity response would be easier than ever. I just hope it's offered in the Standard version.

I dropped a few lines about Pro at Pianoworld and NorthernSounds.

I'm sure the latter will appreciate it, and too many at the former have already spent far too much on samples.

Incidentally Steinberg recently released their Grand 3 - take a listen to the various "pianos" playing Chopin's Nocturne in B flat minor.

http://www.steinberg.net/en/products/vs...media.html

I'd like some straightforward honest opinions on this one.

DL the midi from:

http://www.kunstderfuge.com/chopin.htm

and render it to wave in PTP Pro for comparison.

Glenn

Wow, I don't even _need_ to try any alternative:  these three "samples of samples" for Steinberg's "attempt" would be enough to make me run, SCREAMING, from the product! 

If you like your Chopin to be all THUNK-THUNK-THUNK, then this is _perfect_.  If you want something even remotely musical, then you'll have to hop on the next train and ride far, far away from the crater.  (This is one of my favourite Chopin nocturnes, to boot. They butchered it.)

I mean, seriously, I can't believe Steinberg used these as "examples."  Just plain awful.

(Think of a world without Pianoteq...  Shudder.)

32 GBs of drive space, to boot -- what a waste!

First of all, I don't think the problem is with the playing (midi file) - it's simply with the samples.

I didn't run screaming, but I almost fell off my chair laughing - I think the expression is ROFLMAO.  Chopin would have committed suicide if he had heard this.

So I listened to Stella by Starlight.  About 10.7 seconds in, there is a bass note that sounds like a gong (lowest C).  Not that I don't like gongs, but they aren't terribly pianistic IMO.  Or maybe they meant to use a gong sound in the bass.

It's sad but true - samples are yesterday's technology.

Glenn

Strange, the pianoteq changes list said that the add-on get few aprimorations.

But after instaled the V3.5 version the old add-ons was imported automatically from V3.05 to V3.5, as the message on pianoteq window said:

"Upgrade notice: your presets and add-ons of version 3.0 have been imported."

Niclas, is that the same add-on from, my V3.0 or must I dowload the add-on from pianoteq website? Or the V3.5 already did that automatically?

I cannot agree with that. Especially not with fortissimos.

Erard could use a better fortissimo, though.

Actually, trying to make a good MIDI performance out of a Chopin nocturne would require a _tremendous_ amount of fine-tuning (and be _very_ instrument-dependent).  I downloaded both of the Op.9-1 MIDIs from KDF and am satisfied with neither of them -- though I certainly enjoy listening to them _more_ in Pianoteq!  (I chose the "Erard Recording" and lowered the impedance to around 0.50 or so -- you kinda _have_ to do so with Chopin.  This is actually somewhat satisfying to my ears, if still off in so many ways.) 

Chopin's nocturnes are such _human_ pieces requiring all manner of different touches and turns, and this example Steinberg provides -- on all 3 Grand3 "instruments" -- fails miserably.  No one who loves Chopin would _ever_ have allowed such clunkers onto a demo page!

Permission to commit suicide granted -- and I wouldn't _blame_ him!  The Scriabin is just as awful in their examples, too.  As for "Pictures," well, I'm kinda accustomed to hearing people bang their way through "Promenade," so "Ugh!" as usual...

Playing "Stella" is kinda like cooking chicken:  hard to mess up!  While the samples there _sounded_ better, I almost think _anything_ quieter would be an improvement after the previous aural assaults.  Sheesh!

I personally don't think it deserves any more attention.  We should focus on topics that are useful.

Glenn

Just tried 3.5 briefly for the first time, mostly C3. Here's what I think I can hear so far:

1. The attacks are better. Previously, the attacks sometimes sounded slightly too vague, as if an attack envelope had been applied to make the attacks less aggressive.   Now, they sound crisper.

2.  The release sounds in the bass notes sound more complex, and very good.  I don't know whether they're just louder now than they used to be, or whether the sounds have changed. (I think they are too loud now, but I'd rather the default be too loud so I can hear what's on offer!)

3. The overall sound is a bit better, but I can't describe how yet.

4. I still perceive a "muffled" character, but less so than before. I.e - it still does not have the complex detail of samples.

EDIT: Just tried some more C3 variations - VERY GOOD!!! I think this is eat-leather-boot time for me indeed.

Greg.

I have just had a go at installing 3.5, and it says it is best if version 3 is removed.
If I chose the remove option, does 3.5 authorise/activate automaticly?

Regards

studio64, yes it imports the activation data, and other preferences, from the version 3.0. Note that you can keep both versions installed if you are using only the standalone, or if your VST/AU/RTAS host can manage  two different versions of the same plugin. The recommendation for uninstalling version 3.0 is there only for hosts that cannot manage those two versions and will only show one of them.

V2 plugins sure can be changed a lot. Try turning on the Sound Recording and play with it a little.

I didn't say they couldn't be changed.  My point was that the v2 sounds (presumably) still sound exactly the same as they did in PT2, and this is important.  Why can't we have the 3.0 model included in 3.5?

I don't see why the algorithm version can't be selected in the UI for your own presets.  Yes there have been UI changes (like now having all resonance combined into a single slider) but these could change to reflect the model selection.

If that could be done, then imported user presets from a previous version should always default to their original model so they remain unchanged.  The user can then specifically select to upgrade them (and then he could A/B them to decide which version to keep).

The point about DAWs is that a performance should never change.  If I record a guitarist I don't expect his track to ever change, but with the PT changes in this version that would happen (if the track is a MIDI performance) without any warning, and that might require a remix (for timbral changes) or even a new performance (for dynamics changes).  This simply shouldn't happen.  User presets should never be changed automatically.

Standard limited to 48kHz booh!

Hi, Skip. I found that if I hear a note as a little muffled, raising the Cut-off slightly helps a lot--lets in just a few more high freqs as the soundboard starts its more stable decay. In a way, letting in a few more of these upper freqs extends the transition from the sound of the transients to the sound of the soundboard. (The muffling is the sound of the soundboard resistance overcoming the force of the strike.) But the exact setting varies by octave and note...

I could, but why should it be necessary?  And the problem with an old DAW project is that it may open the newer version and I may have forgotten that I have to make sure it doesn't - and suddenly the mix sounds weird, and I don't know why.

Modartt have previously made efforts to make the older models available in their newer versions precisely because users want to continue to use their old sounds without clumsy and error-prone workarounds.  I can't see what the problem is - just include the 3.0 model as a separate code path and give the user a choice to update their presets, or not.  The old algorithm never needs to change again right, and if the code is totally seperate from the new model, why should it cause bugs?

Jake,
Yes I know about increasing cut-off and used to experiment with that (and other things) in V3.  I haven't tried this yet in 3.5 I was never completely satisfied in V3 even after doing things like this.

More observations on the V3.5 C3:  It is more satisfying to play softly now - the notes sound like they are going to linger on forever, and sound very clear and distinct.  I now feel like "caressing" the keyboard - I never felt this way with the V3 C3 instrument.
I haven't noticed any special magic in YC5 or M3 yet. C3 seems to be quite a big improvement though. (especially some of the variations)

Greg.

Yeah, the one thing I _possibly_ appreciate most about these guys is that while they're dead-serious about their work, they know how to have a little fun!  I won't watch a movie or TV show anymore that takes itself too seriously, because I've seen so many examples of great programming that can keenly balance intense drama with sharp (or downright hilarious) humour.  MODARTT has proven to be quite similar:  they're genuine people with real pulses, not one-dimensional egotistical hacks from a script.  (Or certain bloated software companies.  ;^)

I had to laugh when I first saw the "hair cut" bit, too.  I can hear it now:  "Just a little off the top, please!"  (Of course, I usually give myself a virtual buzz cut, so maybe not a little.  %^)

We could provide the older version of C1 and C2 as legacy instruments (in V2.ptq) because they were not maintained anymore (not present in version 3.0). But here we have another story: the C3 (and M3, etc.) is still maintained, with its proper character. The only thing is that it has been improved in itself, and I think in a way that should make older presets compatible for recording a new session again. You will have more clarity, better fff, but I cannot see where this could ruin a project. If you have an example where you experiment a real problem while importing older projects, please contact us through the support and we will do our best to solve the problem. Please remember also that actually you can run both versions 3.0 and 3.5 simultaneously, unless you work with a host that does not show both.

Philippe, sorry to be so sincere, but I can't say other thing based in the tests of V3.5

I uninstalled, instaled again, dowload the add-ons from the site and droped in the interface, tested again.

But the sound still is quite uggly. Not sure if is any problem here, but the sound of Erard for many notes sounds like a toy, with very thin artificial sounds.

The M3 piano have many artificial notes a little below midle C, and seens that the extra clarity and new sound details of this new version seens to vastly enhances the perception of those artificial sounds.

Sorry to say. Maybe it's a problem just here, or I'm too fanatic to notice any problem, but the sound it's not what I was expecting.

This is my very first post to the Forum and I first want to thank everyone at Modartt for all their hard work that has made Pianoteq possible. It truly is a wonderful gift that has made playing and making music a joy for me. 

I, too, downloaded the new 3.5 and it does take some adjusting but that's OK. The improvement in the overall sound is worth whatever time I put into it to make it sound like I want it with my set-up. The pianos seem to have more "presence" and a more natural attack and reverberation that I like a lot.

Beto-Music, I just finished tweaking the Erard by softening the hammers and sliding to the left all the parameters in the Design Module. It really helped to mellow the sound and the Erard now sounds more like the version in 3.0 but with the added bloom/presence mentioned above. I hope that works for you. You may have already tried that.

Has anyone found that the last few notes in the bass have a metallic and out of tune reverberation after being played FF? Maybe it's me. It does not occur in the Erard but in the C3, C3LS, M3, and YC5. Any suggestions on how to stop it?

I have learned something from everyone on this Forum and look forward to learning even more.

Beto:

I believe I said this in previous posts over the past months, but it is possible that strange resonances can be created by the room in which one listens.  Depending on the size and shape of a room, some frequencies may be magnified (made louder) by the reverberations in the room.

This is something that we often overlook or forget about.

I had recorded an old pop piece several years ago, that had a repetitive base line (Canadian Sunset if anyone is old enough).

The bass line was developed by the pianist/composer (Eddie Heywood) and it was unique.  Whenever I listened to my recording using the same bass line, the note (two F's below middle C) seemed to buzz.  The buzzing was not noticeable with headphones, and is not noticeable with a Pianoteq rendering.  But when rendered using my Roland piano, this note buzzes.

This would seem to point to an interaction between the particular F from my DP, and the room and/or speakers.

Perhaps the technical people at Modartt could comment on this.

Glenn

In an earlier reply I commented on the improvement in the release sounds. I had completely forgotten that V3 didn't actually have any particular release sound at all - it was just an amplitude envelope (right?).  (I realise that it did have the "key release noise", but that's different - I am of course referring to the sound that is made as the damper gradually deadens the string). 

Unfortunately I do not have a keyboard that transmits release velocity. Given this, I am reducing the Damping Duration so that the release sounds aren't exaggerated in the bass notes. (I can't see any way to adjust the VOLUME of the release sounds, but I haven't RTFM'd yet)

The sympathetic resonance in the upper registers sounds fantastic!

Greg.

I take it there is no way to change the number of keys on the piano? For example, the Bosendorfer Imperial 290 has 97 keys, the extra keys being ones that can produce monstrous bass.

If there is no way to do this, then they need to address it. While being able to change sound characteristics on a per note basis, being able to access those lower keys on a Bosendorfer would most certainly give Pianoteq Pro a definitive edge over the sampled Bosendorfers.