Modartt user forum » Pianoteq user forum » Anyone here own or have access to a Steinway B? Group project?
If anyone could record a few sustained notes of a Steinway B with good mics, we might take a run at creating an FXP. Start with the M model as a point of departure?
We might apportion various ranges or notes to various people and pull it together?
Wouldn't be easier to get a very good Steinway B sampler and record a mp3 for every note, and some chords?
After all, good samplers are recorded in prime conditions, and for a single key listened alone, they are very good.
Well, I've done some of that privately, but I don't feel entirely comfortable with our creating a group project out of it. Skip and I discussed a similar thing. I was originally sure that it would be fine, but as we talked, I saw the problems better. We might only be copying notes and, legally, be in safe territory. But the developer expended much time and effort to create the sample set. Out of our love for the sound that he or she recorded and in part created, we might reduce the developer's business. No need to hurt the ones we love... (sorry)
I would feel better if some kind of agreement could be reached with the developer. Assuming that we could actually create a good replica of the sample set, I don't know what might work for all parties:
1. Pay a licensing fee? It would be steep, to make up for profits lost from the sale of the sample set.
2. Offer to create the fxp with signed contracts saying that the creators would get copies, but he or she would have a full license for selling it, and we would agree not to distribute\sell\give it away?
3. Offer to create it along with the original developer, with the same legal agreement as 2 above? The original developer might offer a discounted version of the fxp\instrument to current owners of his or her sample-based instrument.
4. Ask that Modarrt approach the developer with a similar arrangement? But would Modarrt benefit from such an arrangement? Possibly so. Possibly a great deal--the more pianos it offers, the more people will be attracted to PianoTeq, and a well-known developer would attract purchasers, and would give Modarrt another ear and set of skills and reference samples. Not that it needs any of these, please understand.
What are other possibilities? This conversation had to come up some time. I would imagine that more than one multisample developer might be interested in some kind of arrangement like this--it would give them new revenue, for one thing. And I would imagine that, at least privately, they would love to work with PianoTeq.
(But does anyone have a spare Steinway B sitting around...?)
I don't think there is any copyright problems cause it's not a Steinway Add-on, but just fine tuning another piano to try to make it similar to a Steinawy B
While many people don't have acces to a decent piano, this man plays and burn a good piano:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gPqrQcmKSY
That's what I call warm preset... :-O
That's what I call warm preset... :-O
That's not warm.
THIS is warm:
http://toomanytristans.blogspot.com/200...rt_14.html
(Scroll down to the George Flynn "Trinity" recording. ;^)
I don't think there is any copyright problems cause it's not a Steinway Add-on, but just fine tuning another piano to try to make it similar to a Steinawy B
No, but the samples are copyrighted.
However, listening to the samples and trying to duplicate them, may not be copyright infringement any more than listening to a Steinway and producing an fpx file would be copyright infringement.
One would have to read the fine print carefully.
Do the producers of samples pay royalties to Steinway for recording a Steinway piano and making a sample set called Steinway?
Glenn
I think there is no payment, in the same way USA model makers do not pay to create a Eiffel Tower or Sphinx scale models.
Maybe should be some few tax or agree, after all they are important creations.
Modartt is very ethic about recreate a active trademark. I bet they asked permition to Yamaha to create the YC5.
Have anybody here noticed that samplers from Steinway D vary a lot from a software to another?
Maybe a sampler of a Stweiway should not be called as a reproduction of a stweinway, cause it's probably far from this.
I think there is no payment, in the same way USA model makers do not pay to create a Eiffel Tower or Sphinx scale models.
Have anybody here noticed that samplers from Steinway D vary a lot from a software to another?
Maybe a sampler of a Stweiway should not be called as a reproduction of a Steinway, cause it's probably far from this.
Interesting point.
And if the samples aren't accurate models, then why bother copying them?
Glenn
If it came down to proving that commercial sample-set "A" was used to produce Pianoteq customized model "B," legally I doubt that would be possible. Unless there was a record on this forum where several people agreed to split a commercial sample set up into sections and all work on a couple of octaves, I would challenge anyone to prove that any samples were the source of a Pianoteq model, as:
1) Pianoteq has no samples
2) Samples have a finite length, release markers, may be normalized to a specific output level, organized into groups/velocity layers, none of which Pianoteq has. There is nothing that can be compared between the two products other than the sound, which due to one being produced by discrete samples and the other by a computer model, have an infintessimally small chance of being the same.
Playing devil's advocate somewhat, if Modartt sampled acoustic pianos in order to create PTQ models, and those models are "missing" the "ping/buzz/whoosh/otherwise described transient sounds" then I would suggest that the model is deficient in some way and until Modartt evaluate what that deficiency is, the required realism will not be achieved, regardless of what samples or piano recordings are used.
Best//Neil
Copyright law is a very complex field these days, and full of wonderful surprises, but I would love to know if somewhere in the world the sound of a piano could be copyrighted. Of course 'Yamaha' and 'Steinway' and such are protected trademarks in most countries, but that is something entirely different.
It would lead to all kind of interesting questions, such as do I owe Pleyel royalties (and permissions, etc.) for recording a piece on one of their pianos, and is the sound of a Steinway now sufficiently different from a 19th century one for the copyright not to have expired, etc. No doubt a lawyer could be found to take these positions (for a fee), but does this really happen anywhere?
As an aside: I do hope we don't lose the knowledge and expertise of the people who have suffered through recording a lot of pianos and manipulating samples.
PianoTeq is astonishing. We don't really need sample libraries any more. On the other hand, what happens if we see people like Worra, Hans Adamson, Olivier Truan, and others designing in PianoTeq, working with Modartt and us in some way? Can't be bad. We could still use use their libraries as references as we create our own private pianos, but they could design their own versions. (And ideally offer them at a not too great price.)
Probably just a dream, this intersection of the old world and the new. Maybe just one developer will take an interest in this approach, and others will follow.
Does anyone have a spare Steinway B and some good mics...?
I had email contact with a person in Uruguay, who is piano tuner and piano restorer, and he had acsses to sereval steinways, bosendorfer and other good trademarks.
But he have no much eletronics, good mics etc.
In Uruguay many people have financial problems and are selling vintage steinways by low prices.
Perhaps a bit off topic, but interesting nonetheless:
http://jazztimes.com/articles/20140-steinway-b-piano
My personal taste in grands is the seven foot size. Had a chance a few years ago to test some Yamaha grands; there was a nine foot, a seven foot, and I believe a six foot model (C3?).
I know the salesman quite well (a pretty good pianist - that doesn't include me), and after about an hour of taking turns playing, listening, and comparing the three pianos, we agreed that for non-concert hall work, the seven foot had the best balance of lower/mid/upper range.
The Steinway B would be a nice addition to Pianoteq's "stable".
Glenn
Speaking of Steinway B, I recalled that way back around 2002, the Digital Piano Shootout at http://purgatorycreek.com/ had a recording of their test file replayed by the creator of the midi file on a slightly out-of-tune Steinway B, as he stated himself on the site (was tuned a month earlier). Notice also the unevenness of the sound for the upward run through the keyboard near the beginning.
The mp3 is gone now but I managed to find it through web.archive.org and uploaded it along with a rendition of the midi file by a variation of my latest effort at a "steinway-like" fxp modified for this piece.
I know this fxp may not be to everybody's taste but I find, even though the real piano recording sounds much brighter, that the fxp has some of the character that suits this short piece, even though it has more sustain and less percussive attack than the original. Others may want to use the recording of the real Steinway B as a goal for emulating this model.
What seems to be missing, and is audible in the real piano recording, is the sense of the hammers flying through the air as was mentionend in other threads. This is hard to define but it is there and clearly missing in pianoteq. It gives more of a percussive attack to the sound than is possible with pianoteq, and improvements of the model in this area would probably be, in my opinion, a great addition to the realism.
I agree that Pianoteq is still lacking some of the percussive attack of a real piano, however, I still don't think we can *actually* hear the sound of the hammers flying through the air, either in sampled pianos, or recordings of real pianos.
Greg.
I agree that Pianoteq is still lacking some of the percussive attack of a real piano, however, I still don't think we can *actually* hear the sound of the hammers flying through the air, either in sampled pianos, or recordings of real pianos.
Greg.
I'm in full agreement with this. The small size of a hammer simply cannot generate enough air movement to create any significant sound (significant being defined as audible to humans - while flying in the air, a snowy owl can hear a mouse under the snow, but we don't have this ability).
As for the percussive sound - particularly in the very high registers - this is amply demonstrated by Gilles' mp3 demo of the Purgatory Creek test file. Well done Gilles.
Admittedly I have become accustomed to the sound of Pianoteq in the top couple of octaves (one adapts to a particular piano with time), however I believe anyone that has access to a larger grand piano will immediately recognize that the upper end of an acoustic doesn't have a ringing melodic sound, but is much more percussive than the Pianoteq sound - almost like drum sticks beating on solid wood.
To me, Gilles' demo seems to come very close to the reality of the upper octaves in terms of percussive sound.
Glenn
I have attempted to edit a Steinway close to the mp3 that Gilles uploaded
I've put an fxp in the files section
http://www.forum-pianoteq.com/uploads.p...111_01.fxp
cheers
Hans
right... i just heard what a difference in headphones can do ... listening on a slightly better set right now already shows way too muddy sound...
will try to improve it later using my Sennheiser or Beyer headphones....
I listened to the attempt Gilles created, trying to emulate a Steinway-B
The main problem was with the area from bass to middle range, quite muddy with a vibration overlayed.
Gilles, will you try again?
Anyway, if adjust a piano was a easy task, anyone would tune a piano and so, piano tuners would not be a profession.
The mp3 is gone now but I managed to find it through web.archive.org and uploaded it along with a rendition of the midi file by a variation of my latest effort at a "steinway-like" fxp modified for this piece.
I'm not sure if you're saying you couldn't find the original MIDI file as well as the MP3 file.
I've uploaded it in the File section anyway. Both their Steinway and Bosendorfer files.
Admittedly I have become accustomed to the sound of Pianoteq in the top couple of octaves (one adapts to a particular piano with time), however I believe anyone that has access to a larger grand piano will immediately recognize that the upper end of an acoustic doesn't have a ringing melodic sound, but is much more percussive than the Pianoteq sound - almost like drum sticks beating on solid wood.
Glenn
The duration of the notes in the upper end can vary quite a lot from one piano to another, and I know excellent pianos with long ringing notes up to the last C. At the end, this is a matter of taste, and the important is that it sounds the way you like it. Fortunately this is very easy to change in Pianoteq, particularly in the Pro version, as it is only a matter of soundboard impedance. I uploaded in the files section a “C3 solo recording (short treble)” variant, maybe this is closer to what you like?
PS. By freezing the soundboard impedance, you can "transport" this setting to any other preset.
PS. By freezing the soundboard impedance, you can "transport" this setting to any other preset.
How do you do this?
I like the sound of this file.
Could you do one for the M3 Recording piano?
guillaume wrote:PS. By freezing the soundboard impedance, you can "transport" this setting to any other preset.
How do you do this?
I like the sound of this file.
Could you do one for the M3 Recording piano?
It is very easy to do yourself, just follow these steps:
1) load the “C3 solo recording (short treble)” preset,
2) left click on the check button right to the save button (left to the random button), it will open the check list window,
3) check impedance under the all design settings, as well as direct sound duration and unison width (these 2 changes being less important than the impedance change itself),
4) close the check list window and make sure that the check button is checked (eventually right click on it),
5) change to the "M3 recording" preset; it should show "M3 recording (modified)",
6) save this new preset bu clicking on the save button, naming it for example “M3 recording (short treble)”.
You now have a M3 variant with shorter treble notes.
PS. When finished, uncheck impedance, direct sound duration and unison width in the all design settings list, else you will continue "transporting" these settings from one preset to another at each preset change.
I'm not sure if you're saying you couldn't find the original MIDI file as well as the MP3 file.
I've uploaded it in the File section anyway. Both their Steinway and Bosendorfer files.
As far as I know the midi file is the same for all tests. It is called pianotest1.mid and available on their Overview page.
I just found out I didn't really have to look back in time for the Steinway B though, because it is right there in the long list under "The Real Thing - Steinway B". I just didn't see it...There is also a real Baldwin available.
It worked. Thanks Guillaume.
The duration of the notes in the upper end can vary quite a lot from one piano to another, and I know excellent pianos with long ringing notes up to the last C. At the end, this is a matter of taste, and the important is that it sounds the way you like it.
I've never been very keen on the short percussive sounds of most pianos in the upper octave or so. To my ears these are not sweet musical tones, but more akin to a stick on a block of wood.
The Purgatory Creek mp3 demo of the Steinway B has this percussive sound. While it may be authentic, it isn't a sound I would try to emulate if I was designing a piano (in fact Gilles has done a pretty good job of it with his fpx).
The strength of Pianoteq is that I can design my own piano; I'm not stuck with the physical limitations of wood striking wood, and wood squeaking on leather.
Glenn
PS: Guillaume - can you tell me which specific piano you are referring to that has a ringing tone up to the last C? Thanks
A little off-topic, but: I was in a music store yesterday, and tried out some of the hardware pianos. I was surprised how many of the newish, mid-level ones have a very brief, hard sound that starts at about two octaves above middle C. Particularly the Yamaha's, such as the P155. Most of the sound comes from the attack transients and the reverb.
My larger worry is that with about 1000 people registered here, no one seems to have access to a Steinway B. Is someone going around destroying or hiding them? (All those piano-burning videos...Hmm...)
PS: Guillaume - can you tell me which specific piano you are referring to that has a ringing tone up to the last C? Thanks
Some Pleyel grand pianos built around 1930 have very nice and long singing notes in the high treble.
Edit (additional comment): for a given energy transmitted by the hammer to the strings, you can either:
- spend it slowly, and you have a long sound but not very loud,
- spend it fast, and you have a short but loud sound.
When played together with a real (acoustic) orchestra, power is the most important, thus the tendance towards short sounds. In the virtual world which allows additional amplification, there is no more loudness constraint, and thus long sounds are possible.
Some Pleyel grand pianos built around 1930 have very nice and long singing notes in the high treble.
Hmmm, I can't seem to find one in Pianoteq - any plans for a Pleyel in the future?
Glenn
It is on the long list of things we would like to do.
Speaking in Pleyel...
A interesting case of conjoined Grand-twins :-)
Speaking in Pleyel...
A interesting case of conjoined Grand-twins :-)
Very interesting, yes quite conjoined.
It sounds like they have detuned it quite a bit.
It must have two separate sets of strings because they each have pedals.
Now, how many soundboards does it have?
Wonder what it weighs? Wouldn't this be a killer to move, and it must be wicked to tune.
Glenn
See more in:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxUiy4TmjU8
"About The Piano:
The Pleyel Double Grand Piano is truly a unique musical instrument, as only a handful now remain throughout the world. Some 50 double grand pianos were produced in the Pleyel piano factory in Paris but, sadly, most of these were eventually destroyed in the mayhem of two world wars.
This type of musical instrument was originally developed by the company in the 19th century and the last double grand was said to have left the factory in around 1930.
The two keyboards are placed at opposite ends of this 2.5 meter long instrument that weighs nearly 600 kilograms. The brilliance of the design lies in the fact that, although the two pianos are housed in one body, both have their own sets of wires, pedals and mechanism. (With a special switch, the Pleyel design also makes it possible for one of the players to operate the pedals of the other if necessary, and this of course also works the other way round.) At the same time, the casting and the resonance - an important element of the instrument - are common to both. All the sounds produced are emitted in a shared space, the overtones enrich each other, and all of this results in a warm and wonderfully full sound.
The instrument embodies all that a piano duo works for, namely the confluence of the two parts into a unified sound.
The fact that, little short of a miracle, a double grand manufactured in 1904 - having escaped the catastrophe of two world wars - suddenly appeared for sale in Switzerland in 1995, brought a decisive moment in the career of the Egri & Pertis Duo. The instrument has consequently been in the duo's possession since 1996. "
I'm not sure how close you can emulate steinway b (or any piano) by just tweaking an existing piano model. I think one need to create a PTQ in order to accomplish something like this. I think there are a lot of other dimensions not tweakable in fxp, not even the pro version.
I do own a steinway b though, and a humble (but good enough) pair of M-Audio Pulsar II mics. Here's a sample of a recording I did a while back: http://binokino.com/download/st_test.mp3 . Sorry the mp3 is a bit gritty. Let me know if this would be useful.
I haven't been using pianoteq for a while now and I just tried version 3.51. It's definitely much better than version 2.
abiharbani:
Your piano sounds lovely, and the recording exposes the sound well. I worry that you're right about the difficulties of using an existing instrument to create a sound that is so distinct. But could we try?
How would you feel about a test of sorts? If you posted a recording of one note at three velocities, we could see how close we could come to duplicating the one note. (These velocity recordings could all be in one mp3 or wave file, instead of in separate files, to save time.)
I understand a worry that could arise here--that I'll eventually ask you to do the same for each note, until you've created a multisample. That would be asking too much. But what might let us find a way to go forward--a method that would not demand too much of you but would let us have reference recordings? Could you, perhaps, eventually, over several weeks, record one note in each octave, at 3 velocities? Those recordings, along with the recording that you've already posted, might take us a long way. (You mention that the recording is a segment of a longer recording. I'd love to hear the entire piece.)
Several of us might go together on this project, trying different methods to achieve the sound. You would of course receive our attempt(s) at an emulation of your piano. We would all learn from these attempts: we would not be creating "a Steinway B." We would be trying to create this specific Steinway B as we try to recreate exactly the same sound for each reference recording.
On the other hand, if I'm asking too much, I certainly understand. Thank you for taking the time to post the lovely recording.
I'll see if I can do some recording later this week. I will record a couple of bass notes and tenors with 3 velocities. I feel that pianoteq's treble sounds good enough out of the box. I like creart's fxp treble section posted above.
The short recorded piece was just an improvisation I did for testing the mic. I was thinking about writing it down for a complete piece, but never got a chance to. Maybe next year.
This is very good news. Thanks so much. Do you have a name that you would like to give this piano or project? (Or had you rather wait until you hear the results first...?)
It occurs to me--should we ask that a folder be set up in the Files area for this, so we don't clutter the main area with samples and fxps as we go back and forth with visions and revisions?
Nic--Is that even possible? Pleeze?
And are there volunteers for this project? Can we work together instead of creating 5-10 entirely different instruments?
Hey guys - count me in...
I have asked a comparable question for some 'key-notes' to design a good piano from quite some time ago, so ya let's go for it... as long as Abi likes to do it on his part that is...
cheers
Hans
I'm sorry to keep running on about this project, but the possibilities are exciting. Let's just hope that Philippe, Nic, and Julien will weigh in, too.
And as abiharbani said, we may find that we can only approximate the sound. If we can get close, perhaps the developers could then take it to a higher level, and, as abiharbani indicated, move it into a ptq?
Holding my breath, now.
Folks, specially the new ones in the forum, or those who not not knows well pianoteq yet.
I want to remamber the difference of using setting adjust to try imitate a piano brand, and the creation of a new add-on to duplicate a piano brand.
You may end in a very fine beautiful piano sound by by adjusting settings, but I don't match so well what would a add-on created by Modart to simulate a piano brand.
So if you are new in the forum, do not judge the modelled technology just by the setting we create trying to turn a piano brand into another.
A add-on it's a full analyze of a real piano, and it's made very carefully by Modartt.
Setting adjust it's a very personal subject. What is good for one may not be for others. If you are new here, get the demo version and start try yourself to find your own adjust to please your own taste.
Don't forget to read the entire manual.