PianoTeq is amazing (Page 1 of 2)

Posts by bona fide professional pianists seem to be few and far between on the forums. I'd be grateful if you could share with us your gear (MIDI controller, phones, speakers) and how you use Pianoteq (e.g., D4 Daily Practice only) and how you tweak it and what limitations you find in the use of digital instruments. Also, are you finding your colleagues to be interested or dismissive of Pianoteq? I studied piano as a non-major in college in the 90s, and I often wonder how much better I'd have become with a digital setup then like I now have. Thanks.

Hi again!

Well, I've started a series of blog articles on my website about incorporating digital piano into the "toolkit" of a classical pianist. I haven't gotten to the software part yet, but so far my pianist friends have been mixed in their reactions. I hear from them mostly on Facebook or by email. I think it will take a while plus hands-on experience before classical pianists adopt digital tech widely. But, I am sure it's going to happen.

I am using a Yamaha P-140 with Sony MDR-7506 headphones. I don't even have speakers that are suitable for this purpose. The whole point of using digital for me is for practicing at night without disturbing others.

I started out by checking out the various D4 presets. I found them all much too bright for my taste. This is probably because I've always played New York Steinways. Not only that, but my piano is a Steinway L with an especially mellow tone. So, I've tweaked the D4 to make it warmer and introduced enough variation in it that it sounds more "real". I will share the FXP when I'm sure I'm completely pleased with it.

I used a sample-based software piano for a couple of months, and I loved it. I even made a nice recording with it that I will share soon. But as soon as I tried PianoTeq 5 last week I started wondering if it would be even better for my purposes. I started out with Stage, a few days later upgraded to Standard, and after a few more days Pro! I think the strength of PianoTeq is the customizability, especially for someone like me who has been playing for 35 years, and I know what I like to hear. I really felt like I needed the Pro version because I wanted to increase hammer hardness only in the melodic register. I actually had that done to my Steinway this year. I can't believe how fun it is to do this stuff with PianoTeq. So impressed with it! And like I said, not only does it enable me to get some good work done, but I actually really enjoy playing it. I get lost in the music. Never thought that would be possible.

My website with the blog posts: http://fundamentalkeys.com

Hi Rachel!, your blog has been an amazing discovery. It's very rare to find a blog that covers so interesting topics in such an articulate and interesting way. I love it!. I think I'll spend the whole day on it, is adicting lol.

Also, as someone who played his whole life on digitals in an amateur way, it was a shock when I finally could buy an old Erard baby grand. I was surprised by the aftertouch, I was overpedalling a lot but in the end I managed to play good on it, and then, only then I felt I could practice on digitals in a good way, just like you said, is better to know acoustics and then you can use digtaals in the right way.

Also, on samples, is impossible to sound bad, isnt?, as they are the most beautiful recorded samples so you will never sound harsh or give a bad tone, I found that even overpedalling is not a big of an issue with samples. However, Pianoteq is different, is closer to the real thing in the sense that you have to hear your playing and produce a nice tone and be careful with the pedal, I love that. Even when I still find harder to sound good on acoustics, I have to be more careful with everything, I even have a couple recordings of the same piece on both a Steinway D and samples or pianoteq and it still I think that recorded, it sounds better on digitals, but it was camera mic so that maybe be the problem.

I'd love to know your detailed differences between acoustiscs and digitals, maybe is in the blog and I havent reached it yet.

Thanks a lot again. You seem to have a truly love for the instrument.

Hi, I fell in love with Pianoteq for its Blüthner grand. I love the Blüthner sound, and the PTQ reproduction is, while of course not completely accurate, close enough to make a really beautiful virtual instrument. And also, though I work with the presets more often than not, the ability to just change a few parameters for a given situation is something I don't want to miss ever again.

One tip: I have found that many modern budget sound cards are utter crap, even supposedly better ones like the ones by Creative Labs (who claim 90dB SNR for e.g. the SoundBlaster Play!, a small USB device). Stick with a good USB2 sound device made for recording purposes, e.g. by Zoom or by Steinberg. The cheap thingies produce distortions in the upper frequencies, due to a mixture of cheap hardware and incorrect handling of the sample reconstruction in the driver. I won't go into the mathematics here, but if you run a frequency sweep from 8 to 20kHz (e.g. with Audacity), you should just hear the sound getting higher and more faint. On the SB Live! I mentioned, you get very ugly aliasing sounds starting at about 10KHz. Since a Piano is an instrument that produces a lot of high frequencies, these distortions can be very much audible, once one knows what to listen for.

I control Pianoteq with a Kawai VPC1, the most 'grand-like' MIDI controller I have found so far. With headphones and Pianoteq, I can actually forget at times that I am not sitting in front of a real piano. Which is indeed an amazing feat; kudos to both Kawai and Pianoteq for that.

And while we are comparing headphones: I absolutely love my beyerdynamic DT990. 'Open' design, and they produce an amazingly neutral, yet very detailed and rich sound.

Just letting you guys know I just uploaded 3 FXP's.

One is really dry, one is really reverberant, and one is in between.

Depending on what you are practicing for, it's good to test how you sound in different situations. The best pianists can adjust to conditions on the fly -- changing articulation and even tempo to suit the piano and the room.

I am jealous! As soon as I started playing around with software, I found out about the VPC-1. I want it!

I used to play on an MP6, which has the 'Responsive Hammer' keyboard. This was already quite good. But then my local dealer ordered one VPC1, invited me to try it out... and I put my MP6 up for sale on the same evening. Since Pianoteq has essentially spoiled me in terms of built-in sound anyway, I only need the keyboard and pedals, so the VPC1 exactly hits the mark.

The RM3 Grand keyboard action is really cool. The keys are wooden with a synthetic ivory coating, just like 'real' grand keys. And the action is very close to that of a real grand piano action, i.e. essentially a balance beam. The "Grand Feel" action featured in the MP11 might be a tiny bit better (the keys are even longer to precisely match a real grand)... but the fact of the matter is that you will have a hard time finding anything comparable at even a remotely similar price point.

The only disadvantage I currently know is the VPC1 editor. It needs a special Kawai USB driver on Windows machines (just playing works fine without it, however), and this driver has a known compatibility problem with Windows 8 and certain USB3 chipsets (and alas, I have a computer with exactly one of those). On the other hand, one does not really need the editor.

Hi Rachel,

open-design headphones usually offer a more 'open' acoustic result, with a slightly better localisation of the stereo image. The actual difference is really whether the headphones block out external noise or not, so the question if all open-design headphones offer better acoustics than all closed ones is in my opinion not easy to answer. It is also a question of what you are looking for in headphones. Closed designs are extremely valuable if external noise is a problem or if you don't want to hear the headphones' sound on a recording (i.e., when you are recording a singer).

An actual, tangible difference is the level of comfort. I find open headphones much easier to wear over long periods of time, and I actually find completely shutting of external noise a bit uncomfortable. A compromise between isolation and comfort are 'half-open' designs, as you might have guessed.

Then there's impedance. Higher impedance headphones tend to have a better resolution, though this sometimes comes with a price (i.e., having to use a pre-amplifier). Again, there is no real 'absolute' recommendation. The only other thing I find worth noting is the frequency response.  Headphones made for monitoring purposes tend to draw a much more level and 'honest' audio image, which is the reason I am working with beyerdynamic DT-990s: I do not quite like the usual pronounced high and low frequencies in many headphones (makes the response curve almost shaped like an 'M'). Oh, and they are also extremly comfortable.

However: if you are comfortable with your Sony MDR7506s, keep using them, the specs also look nice enough. Of course visiting a dealer and trying some newer models is never a bad idea.

My Koss Portapro's are night and day better than the MDR's I use at work.

What is special about open? It is simple physics; the open design means that it is a naked driver up against your ear. The air outside is free to move as it pleases (no pressure). You hear exactly what the driver vibrates, following the natural principles of sound in space.

As soon as a closed design is introduced, there is an unnatural 'pocket' of buffering air around the driver, which requires all sorts of clever engineering to maintain a natural sound propagation model. Very expensive closed phones do what it takes, but its always a matter of compromise and gimmickry.

Low cost closed results in: coloration of voicing, dulling of detail, punchy lows with 'body' (good thing), and quick drop of from attack (no air tail..)

Open results in extremely nuanced detail, rich high dynamic range midtones, 'air' tail in the 'space' around the notes (soundstage and presence), and no muddy coloration. A downside is the bass punch from large sound sources felt in real life is lessened... there is less 'pressure' to the initial attack of low frequencies, though the volume of bass can be every bit as good and present as closed. (in the case of the MDR, there is very minimal very low frequency to begin with)

To summarize:
Open = Rich, natural, organic, airy
Closed = Punchy, canned

Non sound: as Kalessin notes, there is something very comfortable about not being acoustically closed off from the outside world; it is a subtle pleasant thing that I love. Also, sound goes in and out of open phones with ease, so keep that in mind for practical purposes (not a problem for me 99% of the time)

As kalessin also notes, most headphones are not 'linear' in frequency distribution, one of the reasons the Sony's are so often bought for production purposes (they aim for linear). This can be simply addressed by using the EQ feature of pianoteq, and plugging in the inverse of your phones frequency graph (what I do with the Portapros which are too loud in the 100hz-250hz range, and too low above 4000hz). I also should note that I had broken in these particular PPros very nicely by playing moderate volume classical string music for a day on loop, which really seems to have put them above other PPros that I had not initially broken in this way. Also, I did the 'Kramer mod' by drilling in holes on the plastic guard between the ear and driver, which resulted in greater air and high freq detail.

For these reasons, I would not recommend a Ppro (not linear, needs tlc to reach full potential). I would start with Grado SR80i which are factory broken-in to maximize driver detail/tone balance, and time tested for their linear richness. To dabble in open, you might pick up a Koss KSC75 for $20, which are more linear than Ppros; you should ideally break them in first (day long loop of moderate volume strings worked well for my special Ppros) The clip design tend to weaken low frequency response, but its a great deal on such drivers for $20.. And remember, its the sound card that is driving half the sound (a good new card can make it sound like you did a phone/speaker upgrade)

When you try them, bring an iPhone/pad or Samsung Galaxy w/ PowerAmp app (great audio quality) with your favorite music loaded, as well as your Sony MDRs... hearing your favorites will be a revelation on the open.. even without breaking them in.

As to the PPros, I can go for hours forgetting they are on, both in terms of the lightness/comfort, and psycho-acoustics. Disorientation is particularly down to the open/closed acoustics... and then there is the matter of physical pain from heavy/cumbersome design.

Sage, thank you thank you for all that great info! I do believe I am convinced, and I have been a little uncomfortable with my headphones. I wasn't sure why, but now I think it is the closed design that might have been bothering me!

I will look at those Grado's!

Vjau, I will refer you to my website where I discuss this ad nauseam and am writing more about it all the time. The short answer is that I think a digital is a great tool for beginners. I prefer them over uprights. My current recommendation to students is to start out with something at least as good as a Yamaha P-105. As for how PianoTeq fits in, I will be getting into all my thoughts on PianoTeq soon on the blog. My initial feelings after using it for 2 weeks are that it can be a great tool but only if the right presets are used.

See:
http://fundamentalkeys.com/digital-pianos-beginners/

And then read some of my more recent articles on the subject if you like!

Oh, and Sage, Kalessin and others, do you mind if I ask what you do musically? Just curious where your knowledge comes from.

Thanks! I just added to my post above a question about what you do musically? Curious where your knowledge comes from.

Film music -

I trained with a former North Korean concert pianist (before the war/lockdown)... she would teach kids with a hard core ethic that you wouldn't find in other local teachers typically. As a result, I tackled some of the most absurd stuff I could find, as a liked the extreme fiery classical pieces (Rach/Liszt). I can still play a mean Fantasie Impromptu. Now, I improv film scores, as my primary focus is filmmaking. My best crazy music is not on streaming, but this is an example of my filmmaking & music composing:
https://vimeo.com/56309626

Pianoteq 3:
https://vimeo.com/25269908

Non piano (password: pianoteq)
https://vimeo.com/22516504

Thanks Sage. Really enjoyed those videos!

Well, it's been a while but last time I tried headphones I experienced that Beyerdynamic sounded nice, yes, but they were not linear. They all stressed highs and basses. Maybe that's not the case for newer models.

Even if I wouldn't spent so much money in headphones I would try electrostatic ones just to have a reference point. For me they are the best you can get.

I am actually an amateur, more or less. I am a physicist by vocation, so wanting to know how stuff works comes natural to me. In terms of music, I play privately with mixed success (my teacher still tries to teach me to do jazz and blues impro, for example) and take singing lessons to at least occasionally force me out of my comfort zone. Since I cannot currently use a real piano at home (mainly for practical reasons), I am quite happy to have Pianoteq and the VPC1. (Connect a good sound interface and a pair of at least half-way nice speakers, e.g. active monitors, and the result gives many a digital piano twice as expensive a run for its money.)

Concerning headphones: I have long had an interest in audio processing and compression. Stuff like this tends to sharpen your perception, which is also why I cannot listen to highly-compressed MP3s anymore (200kbps and above are acceptable, albeit barely). I nowadays tend to hear details that I did not in the past and a lot of others still don't, like the atrocious background noise most (even high-end!) mobile phones tend to create, making listening to music at low volume levels almost impossible. Or like certain compression artefacts e.g. in bad MP3s. And the longer I work with 'real' equipment (and be it in the lower price ranges like Zoom recorders or the smaller Steinberg interfaces), the more I dislike the stuff that is sold as computer or even hifi equipment...

Exactly. It also depends on what the design goal was. The DT-880 and DT-990 belong to a series of studio headphones made specifically for professional purposes. The DT-880 is marketed for 'reference hearing, mixing and mastering' while the DT-990 is marketed for 'analytical hearing'. I actually studied several reviews including frequency curves and tried several different headphones until I settled on the 990s specifically for their good linearity at an affordable price point.

I'd definitely recommend Presonus audio interfaces. Presonus has some very well written ASIO drivers (although, RME are the best - but consequently the most expensive). I'd give Presonus an edge over anything that says Zoom or Steinberg on it.

Why the hell are you still posting here? Go apply for a job at Modartt! Having two more helping hands and another brain can't be a bad thing!

At least it's easy to bring them back, when funds allow

Thanks. Yes, I know the produced recordings would be the same, but for practicing/listening you all seem to be saying that I would get better sound into my headphones using a better audio interface.

You wouldn't get THAT much better sound in contrast with the price difference between various interfaces (IMHO speakers/headphones play a much bigger role here than choice of audio interface), but you would get lower latency courtesy of properly written ASIO drivers (Presonus, RME, etc.).

I don't know if there are the best, but i have enjoyed my DT-880 for more than ten years and i love them.

Yes, and no. From a pure sound perspective, you are actually quite right. I own a (incredibly cheap) pair of Superlux phones that actually sounds better than many a pair for 150 bucks and more. However: it's made of cheap plastic, quite uncomfortable by comparison, and you get absolutely no spare parts. It's still really great value for 30 bucks, but there's a reason that this is my spare pair of headphones and not the main.

(Note: I do think extremely expensive headphones ($300 and above) are usually way overpriced considering their actual benefits, but there is a thing like 'buying too cheap'. Just my $0.02. )

RME goes down to 2 ms, for example.

But anyways, that's not the whole latency (round-trip). It's just ASIO input/output buffer latency.

Really cool, Sage! Is that the Bluthner?