No, I know my (or for that matter - anyone else's) opinions are far from absolute. Everything is relative.
It just saddens me when people can't hear the obvious qualitative difference in sound which sets Pianoteq leaps and bounds above just about any sampled piano library.
BTW welcome to the forum
First time buyer here, tried 4.5 demo but didn't like the sound.
I got excited about the update so rushed to buy Stage. Love the concept, excellent playability and cool interface (velocity setting is best in class). I play classical on a Numa Nero, mostly on Vintage D (favorite samples/playability combo by far).
Overall I'm quite happy with the sound, and was favorably surprised by the Pleyel for instance (quite close to the OldBlackGrand samples, but far more playable).
But one thing that strikes me is that at medium-low velocities the sound (on D4, K2) is too close to an e-piano sound and not that realistic...at higher (and lower) velocities the attack improves (although "Beethoven" style FF chords sound too sterile and not very musical)...
I have not run through all the presets yet, but is there an obvious setting that I should look at to get less of the "bell sound" of an electric piano at medium-low velocities? I tried the "pop" Eq setting for instance, and it does improve things as little...
Thanks for any help.
My first impressions:
WOW! Fantastic evolution of the mathematical model! Major improvements on all pianos. In my opinion, the upgrade to v5 is mandatory (and the cost is quite reasonable).
Even "out of the box", I could already feel the differences. But when you tweak the controls to match your liking... its mind blowing.
Kudos for Modartt! Job well done!
Chortle. (I'm looking forward to the day when I'm stone deaf, because then Pianoteq will definitely sound the same as my sample libraries!)
Greg.
It is intresting, I made a comparison of Ivory 1.6 Steinway and Pianoteq 5 D4 in Cubase. Side by side. There is such little difference in timbre, that it is sometimes hard to say, when one play and when another Later I'll make some video comparison.
I'm finding v5 pianos very exciting to play! There's so much more dynamic colour and expressive range and also vivid presence - as if the piano is physically really occupying the space.
I have posted a little video about my first impressions:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mF9xh5Y...8yzyTHLq1A
I think mic choice and placement - rather like speaker choice and placement - is an inevitable factor that affects the sound for this kind of technology. I like to place the mics in the same virtual space that my speakers occupy. So this extra flexibility and choice is great! I wish I also had lots of top notch studio monitors to switch between!
Sadly, I haven't the slightest understanding of the technical aspects of physical modelling. Is it my imagination..? But I actually feel as if all the pianos sound richer and more dynamic; clearly some more than others. Something I've noticed is that pieces I've recorded on the v4 D4 sound rather nice on the new K2. But I must admit that I believe that my expressive choices - dynamics, articulation etc. - are very directly influenced by the piano I'm playing. So I'll definitely keep v4 on my system too as I've lots of stuff created on the old D4. Of course - over time, I'll re-record stuff just as I did when v4 come out.
Could be my impression, but it seems as if the limiter has also improved when playing at loud volume. Or am I just imagining things? I used to have to lower the volume a bit when using Binaural mode but this is no longer true. (Maybe it's just the mic gain that is fixed/improved)
It already sounds better than any sample library, too bad that you can't hear it...
Arguing about this is not productive as everybody has their own preferences.
Acoustics have a wide range of sound and playability so in this context, Pianoteq is "realistic". You hear a buzzing in this note? Something metallic in that one? Not enough wood here? Too much wood there. Guarantee you there is an acoustic piano somewhere in the world that sounds & plays just like that.
So in skip's defense, if he/she is looking for certain piano sounds/characteristics, the sample library based on that specific piano will reproduce it perfectly up to as much as can be recorded. Yes not everything can be recorded (e.g. sympathetic resonance permutations) with today's technology -- but not everybody needs or cares about it. If someone's ideal piano is a Steinway D or a Bosendorfer 290 and the overriding mission is to get that exact sound, Pianoteq won't scratch that itch.
...except Pianoteq does do the Steinway D sound with the D4 model.
...except Pianoteq does do the Steinway D sound with the D4 model.
The correct phrasing is that it has a modelled piano based on the Steinway D. That has a totally different connotation.
Wow, five hours non-stop since 4am and man I love PT5 more and more. Huge improvements over 4.5 and I have fallen absolutely head over heels for the "new" YC5. Yeah it's a "rock" piano, but try rockin' some Bach Goldberg variations or WTK. It's brilliant!!!
Yet YC5 can also be sweet and delicate... so beautiful
I'm finding v5 pianos very exciting to play! There's so much more dynamic colour and expressive range and also vivid presence - as if the piano is physically really occupying the space.
I have posted a little video about my first impressions: ...
Great demo! Under your expert hands, the very real differences between all the new instruments are very well put into the spotlight...
@ EvilDragon: Live and let live!
When E. Dragon was young and his heart was an open book
He used to say live and let live
(you know he did, you know he did you know he did)
But if this ever changing software world in which we're living
Makes he give in and cry
Say live and let die
Live and let die
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swVoXHVW-jI
;-)
I just downloaded v5 yesterday and am liking it. I was a bit worried when someone posted that it was brighter than v4.5,
since I hear a lot of detail through my rig. After playing though a few jazz standards, it doesn't sound brighter to my ears but rather more "spacious" or "present". Just more realistic overall, though I was fond of the C4 Jazz A/B and B/A from v4.5.The C4 jazz presents from v4.5 had a more compressed sound to them as if someone had thrown a blanket over the piano a la' Norah Jones. Maybe someone will figure out how to make a preset that sounds like the v4.5 version.
The K2 is a WORLD better than the old K1, and the U2 upright also sounds much better to my ears.
I don't hear anything like high-frequency "buzzing", but there is a little bit of extra "sheen" that sounds like harp resonance to
me--the strings resonating separately from the soundboard. The same thing can be heard on a real grand piano. Mostly a good thing but there are a couple of keys that could use some tuning of this effect. Playing C2/D2 keys on the Jazz B/A from C4 I though it was a bit too pronounced on the C2 key.
Well done Moddart guys and gal!
It just saddens me when people can't hear the obvious qualitative difference in sound which sets Pianoteq leaps and bounds above just about any sampled piano library.
It just saddens me that you don't seem to be able to hear the slightly artificial tone is in the upper range, (especially when you play loud). The best sampled libraries sound more realistic.
But pianoteq is the best tool in the world when you want to create your own piano, hands down! Plus, it's the most playable virtual instrument I've ever played. so Pianoteq is great, no doubt, but stop claming in every forum that pianoteq sounds better than any sampled libraries , it's not true, plus, I'm sure you don't even know all the new sampled libraries.
plus, I'm sure you don't even know all the new sampled libraries.
I do. And I've tried them all.
Jordan, some people, when listening piano music, find the harmonics interaction more important than few aspect not fully 100% natural in tone.
I presume some people can hear more harmonic aspects, while others notice more tone details.
Pianoteq goal it'n not just playing and adjust at own taste, but also about listen the natural harmonics too.
Well, maybe I'm not really updated about the lastesyt version of the best piano sampled libraries, since some have algorithms to try recreate some harmonics. But as far as I was concerned the recreation of harmonicsin sample base technology were somewhat limited.
EvilDragon wrote:It just saddens me when people can't hear the obvious qualitative difference in sound which sets Pianoteq leaps and bounds above just about any sampled piano library.
It just saddens me that you don't seem to be able to hear the slightly artificial tone is in the upper range, (especially when you play loud). The best sampled libraries sound more realistic.
But pianoteq is the best tool in the world when you want to create your own piano, hands down! Plus, it's the most playable virtual instrument I've ever played. so Pianoteq is great, no doubt, but stop claming in every forum that pianoteq sounds better than any sampled libraries , it's not true, plus, I'm sure you don't even know all the new sampled libraries.
The "best" piano sample libraries provide huge numbers of audio snapshots and can sound good in a mix, but I've yet to play a sampled piano that sonically responds to my touch in such an organic and beautiful manner as Pianoteq 5. I'm with the Dragon on this... Pianoteq 5 is indeed leaps and bounds ahead. More mics and HD space don't make a better, more elegant piano sound.
Modartt does.
But that's what Jordan said.
Well I won't speak for him because if he's the 'original' one has enough balls and piano knowledge to reply by himself but I understand his message.
From the pure sound or tone side PTQ is closer and closer to the real instrument and every new model is a big step up. The PTQ team is very good and I found betatest sessions very pleasing and constructive; the results are under our eyes (ears?) but again, only from the tone side, samples are still unbeatable. Yes, the give a static image of the sound but is a prefect image. As a pianist I always hear something 'uncomfortable' in PTQ sound even if, with newer versions, is more and more difficult to feel it. But is still there and every acoustic pianist can feel it. I started to play at the age of 4 thus I know very well the 'right' sound; maybe I couldn't describe it but I can feel it.
Said that PTQ remains my first virtual piano choice since version 2 when I play, create and even mix. Its playability is miles ahead from sampled instruments. From this point of view is a real piano since the first version I used. I considered it, in the past, as an instrument by itself: a strange sounding piano, but definitely a piano (obviously played with a good keyboard) with its special but definite character.
Now as experience on model programming and CPU power become bigger and bigger the sound is very close to the real thing and this new version is almost perfect.
Following this path I assume we'll be there very soon
Well, my point of view.
Well, I had a play through all the Kremsegg instruments last night. The Bechstein is very nice. The only other one that I like is the Erard -- the older they are, the less I like the sound except for the anomaly of the Erard. I'm sure they sound fine in the right hands and with the right music (such as in Phil's excellent YT vid above), but they don't sound nice to my ears or right for my playing.
It's a shame the Kremsegg instruments are bundled together and aren't sold individually, for say €15 a piece. I would definitely buy the Erard and the Bech. I don't think I can justify buying both collections just for those two and I'll think twice about buying KC2 just for the Bechstein.
I suppose if I never used the other historic instruments it'd be no different to buying "just" the Blüthner for the same money, but psychologically that seems like getting a lot for your money (because I like it), whereas buying four and only ever using one (even though I quite like it) seems somehow to be a bit of a waste.
I guess perhaps I only like the sound of modern pianos, but then I loved the late 1890s Bechstein grand I played a few years ago and I adore my own youthful 1903 Bechstein upright (although obviously that's going to sound different).
Ultimately, I'd love Modartt to do a modern (or more modern) Bechstein in the way they did with the Blüthner.
In my opinion every change towards version 4.5 is an improvement. However, sampled pianos won't be outdated that soon, I think. You just have to accept that neither sampling nor modelling are equal to a real piano. Both technologies contain restrictions and simplifications. It's a matter of weighing up pros and cons and of course taste.
I'm curious about how the Steinway sounds the D4 is based on. Could be that some people just don't like the sound of the source. Every piano sounds different...
So Modartt: I'd appreciate it if you offered a comparison with same mics and mic positions.
And: Please model the Vintage D source Steinway at Bauer Studios in Ludwigsburg, Germany !
And: Please model the Vintage D source Steinway at Bauer Studios in Ludwigsburg, Germany !
Blech, I think it's time for a Bösendorfer model at last!
Notyetconvinced wrote:And: Please model the Vintage D source Steinway at Bauer Studios in Ludwigsburg, Germany !
Blech, I think it's time for a Bösendorfer model at last!
Hear, hear. It's always nice to have alternatives to Steinways -- they're done to death and you hear them everywhere, you'd think other makes didn't exist the way some people talk.
Of course, they are everywhere, by fair means or foul (if some of the stories are to be believed) and consequently I tend to have a knee-jerk reaction against Steinways for those reasons.
Ask to sell each one individually perhap is to force too much.
But a good idea would be a option to choose 4 models between the 8 new historic models, and pay 59 dolars.
The bechstein sounds close to modern piano. I think the only distint diference is that it have straight strings (hope the term translation it's this) and not crossed strings.
It's a shame the Kremsegg instruments are bundled together and aren't sold individually, for say €15 a piece. I would definitely buy the Erard and the Bech. I don't think I can justify buying both collections just for those two and I'll think twice about buying KC2 just for the Bechstein.
I suppose if I never used the other historic instruments it'd be no different to buying "just" the Blüthner for the same money, but psychologically that seems like getting a lot for your money (because I like it), whereas buying four and only ever using one (even though I quite like it) seems somehow to be a bit of a waste.
I guess perhaps I only like the sound of modern pianos, but then I loved the late 1890s Bechstein grand I played a few years ago and I adore my own youthful 1903 Bechstein upright (although obviously that's going to sound different).
Now I have a question.
With this new Pianoteq, it's really important he sound like a real piano ?
Never this question was posed but are you sure that Franzt Liszt and Chopin had the problem to create the sound piano of the XXème siècle like a piano-forte from Beethoven ?
I think no, they wanted more possibility under their fingers and they don't watch behind them.
EvilDragon wrote:Notyetconvinced wrote:And: Please model the Vintage D source Steinway at Bauer Studios in Ludwigsburg, Germany !
Blech, I think it's time for a Bösendorfer model at last!
Hear, hear. It's always nice to have alternatives to Steinways -- they're done to death and you hear them everywhere, you'd think other makes didn't exist the way some people talk.
Of course, they are everywhere, by fair means or foul (if some of the stories are to be believed) and consequently I tend to have a knee-jerk reaction against Steinways for those reasons.
You are right. It should not be overdone.
I skipped through the presets and think it should be possible to get that Vintage D character I want. The "Punchy" EQ preset is a first step into the right direction.
Maybe someone really skilled likes to make an FXP .
Hello, the K2 it's really amazing for me, I'm so excited and I played a little improvisation for test this new piano.
My performance is dirty, not clean, it's not the subject of this recording but you heard the dynamique of this piano ? It's incredible for a vsti piano :http://www.4shared.com/mp3/R5Srz-yEce/Test_K2.html
Thanks Pianoteq !!
I really enjoyed your improvisation. I can hear your joy in your playing. It is a good example of how the expressiveness of the Pianoteq models allow us to get pleasantly lost in creativity. Thank you for sharing your moment with us.
Now I have a question.
With this new Pianoteq, it's really important he sound like a real piano ?
Never this question was posed but are you sure that Franzt Liszt and Chopin had the problem to create the sound piano of the XXème siècle like a piano-forte from Beethoven ?
I think no, they wanted more possibility under their fingers and they don't watch behind them.
Even if now it's really close you're right.
That's why Pianoteq has been a valuable tool since the beginning of its life.
I have to admit that a minute ago I just fell in love with the Blüthner. That's the sound I love. Now my brain has to understand that there's not only Steinway + I need to test it with a proper hammer action I'm going to get soon. Then it should be time to change my user name .
I'm finding v5 pianos very exciting to play! There's so much more dynamic colour and expressive range and also vivid presence - as if the piano is physically really occupying the space.
I have posted a little video about my first impressions:
I loved your demo. Your Pianoteq sounds better than mine! Mind you, your playing is far better than mine- so that may be it. I'm interested to know what audio you are using. I use my laptops built in soundcard- which is okay but not great.
This begs the question; in pianoteq users opinions, what is a good usb sound card to buy at around £30.00 I can't afford an expensive option so am somewhat limited.
Version 5 is still very disappointing compared to the C instrument of version 3.
Version 5 is still very disappointing compared to the C instrument of version 3.
Indeed, "many people - many opinions" And I always considered v3 the least successful in Pianoteq history since v2 to v5.
Sound cards shouldn't be cheaped out on. Rather save some cash and buy a proper one...
Version 5 is still very disappointing compared to the C instrument of version 3.
Can you identify the square between the geomeric figures bellow:
Lylo wrote:Hello, the K2 it's really amazing for me, I'm so excited and I played a little improvisation for test this new piano.
My performance is dirty, not clean, it's not the subject of this recording but you heard the dynamique of this piano ? It's incredible for a vsti piano :http://www.4shared.com/mp3/R5Srz-yEce/Test_K2.html
Thanks Pianoteq !!
I really enjoyed your improvisation. I can hear your joy in your playing. It is a good example of how the expressiveness of the Pianoteq models allow us to get pleasantly lost in creativity. Thank you for sharing your moment with us.
Hello, thanks for your opinion and it's true, if I wanted record this improvisation it's really because the new K2 give me joy.
Sound like a real piano...
What exactly the meaning of this ?
With the actual latest models, pianoteq sounds fairly more close to a real piano than nearly all sampled pianos.
What is the value of a well recorded tone of a note if the piano have not true natural harmonics or natural feelings?
The superiority of naural tone, comparing good piano samples to pianoteq, it's now so discreet that the natural harmonics of pianoteq are way more relevant.
Now I have a question.
With this new Pianoteq, it's really important he sound like a real piano ?
Never this question was posed but are you sure that Franzt Liszt and Chopin had the problem to create the sound piano of the XXème siècle like a piano-forte from Beethoven ?
I think no, they wanted more possibility under their fingers and they don't watch behind them.
Just felt obliged to drag myself away from being glued to v.5 in order to say a big well done for these massive improvements!
Thank You Modarrt!
Great video Phil
Did I saw right or you have two V-pianos on your studio ?
I have posted a little video about my first impressions:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mF9xh5Y...8yzyTHLq1A
.
Thanks Modartt. The K2 sounds great. I like too the Dohnal PianoForte and look forward the Walter update.
I'm amazed. I was just now comparing the Bluethner of P4 and P5. P4 was awesome, but P5 is much better, richer, real.
For me it's always like this with Pianoteq (I think I started with P2 or P3): it sounds awesome and real and I can't imagine it possibly sounding better, then a new version comes along and shows how much awesomer and more real it could sound. I can hear the strings and the wood, it's organic, it's alive.
I'm just an amateur musician and I'm sure I'm missing tons of details but Pianoteq is doing a truly awesome and magic job.
Thanks a lot.
Hi all
I've played new version just 20 minutes so this is really FIRST impression. I hear new deepness or detail which was not there before. I'd say there's improvement.
Still I hear those problematic qualities which few years ago made me go back to sampled solution. To me it's this upper bass register and f-ff dynamics which sound most unnatural to my ears. You may call it lack of woodiness or whatever. Good or bad but it sounds like pianoteq. Some like it, others not. To me PTQ is best for cinematic or bigger space pianosound. If you wanna sound like Chick Corea or Kenny Barron, PTQ isn't the best option IMO.
P.S. Still my favorite PTQ instrument is vibraphone. Don't take this as a joke or anything like that, I was a vibraphone player when I was young...
P.S. Still my favorite PTQ instrument is vibraphone. Don't take this as a joke or anything like that, I was a vibraphone player when I was young...
I'd say that's a ringing (sorry!) endorsement of the quality of the vibes for all us non-vibe players
after a few hours of music I can say .. wow ... all models sound very good but the Bluethner is my favorite ......
Regards . Paolo
My tone impression, not Pianoteq 5 yet, is Bluethner above every one. Didnt like the K2 that much but the improvisations posted here were really good on it.
Hi all,
Following the very positive changes made in version 5; I have no choice but to return to Pianoteq...
V5 is a big improvment over v4.5, which was already quite good.
Congrats, Modartt !
I preferred bluthner in ptq4.5 somehow, the bigger problem of ptq modelling being for me the attack sound (when mallets hit the strings). I have a stage version, don't know if it depends on this.
I feel like in every piano sound, ptq 4.5 (and more v5 mabye?!?) generates a "pizzicato" sound instead of a "hammer hitting a chord" sound.
I close my eyes and feel like there's some kind of modern or electrical cembalo playing, or a classical guitar with nylon strings and a guitarist nail playing them somehow.
Jazz improvising playing single swinging notes (which is the thing that I do) clearly shows this limit that my ears can't bear.
I agree with Ecaroh, here above, that ptq in general is good for classical or spatial music, mabye also for chords accompaining, even on jazz playing.
Armonization is undoubtable better than in any sampled instrument.
I'm in love with modelling theory, but that's not enought for me once again.
And I hear good demos here and there and sometime wonder if I'm missing something, mabye a good sound card (I'm playing with a integrated windows8 card and asio for all driver) or if that's for the good spatial qualities vs jazz swing limits not showing in those demos...
?
I preferred bluthner in ptq4.5 somehow, the bigger problem of ptq modelling being for me the attack sound (when mallets hit the strings). I have a stage version, don't know if it depends on this.
Please note that in several Bluethner presets, the volume has been slightly reduced in version 5 relatively to version 4, for example by 2 dB in the Studio Recording AB and BA. In a side by side comparison, this can give the advantage to version 4 because instinctively louder sounds better.
Congrats with the PTQ v5 release!
My first impressions: K1 was already very good, and K2 is even better. Sounds both warm and clear, with good dynamics and playability. But it still does not convince me when doing the most difficult and simple test I know: When I just hit one central C, mezzoforte, no pedal, no reverb ... It still does not give me the "real" experience. But none of the virtual/modelled/sampled pianos I have tried have succesfully passed that test :-)
I find the new Kremsegg collections very interesting. The Modartt people must have been working very hard all these months. I need more time to try all the new stuff. I am afraid I will not be able to resist buying them.
Uhhhnnnn ???
A sampled piano in theory should be fine at least to just hear the single C note with no pedal, no reverb, just the MF middle C, the raw C sound. After all, they record the C entirelly that way.
What sound system are you using???
When I just hit one central C, mezzoforte, no pedal, no reverb ... It still does not give me the "real" experience. But none of the virtual/modelled/sampled pianos I have tried have succesfully passed that test :-)
Hello here, i want to share a first test with pianoteq5, i have a good feeling with this K2 !