Pianoteq 5 impressions (Page 7 of 7)

About Yamaha U1TA PE:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl...9IgDeN2GMc

http://www.delamar.de/instrumente/yamaha-u1ta-23453/

It have two transducers as you ca see.  But I wonder if the transducers can get the high frequencies very well. I imagined a transducer for high would be diferente, but appears that both transducers are the same kind.

Kawai use one single transducer, but requires speakers for the high frequencies. So I imagined that the metalic sounds of piano high frequencies could not be recreated very well just with transducers on soundboard as a real piano generate sounds not just from soundboard but also from strings vibrating in the air and the harp.

How it would sound connected to pianoteq, since the soundbaord vibration would also affect the iron frame harp and the strings (a liitle even with silencer) ???
Unless Modartt creates a pianoteq upright preset (specially for this Yamaha model) to send more the sound adequate for soundboard vibrations and less for the sounds for harp.

Uhhhnnn... ?  Does Yamaha also have a transacoustic grand???

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIgDExmschQ

Also transducer activated ????

Both upright and grand transacoustic models were at NAAM 2014.  The upright began shipping in April the grand will begin shipping in November.

Bill

Good question. Layering acoustic with other, digital sounds is one. Using digital piano at low volume and as silent piano with Yamaha built in samples, PTQ or other digital pianos on computer. Use digital when acoustic is out of tune? Perhaps the upright action with a great digital grand sound will be superior to upright acoustic? I can attest that having a real piano action when playing digital sounds is a blessing, far better than digital piano actions. I'd like to try this transacoustic beast myself, will go to showroom when I have time.

Here are Yamaha's selling points:

http://usa.yamaha.com/products/musical-...mode=model

In any case, 17K for a Yamaha U1 upright with this technology is pushing it, to say the least. A U1 is about 7-8K new.

I think you are saying that Pianoteq would be better than Ivory (sampled) playing through transacoustic system as it is more flexible. I'm not sure how it all works, but I know that sounds coming through the transducer soundboard also affect the harmonics of the acoustic strings, creating some type of hybrid sound.

In my book such a transducer system is just another type of speaker, albeit maybe not a very linear one. So the equalizer of Pianoteq should be our friend there. The damped strings would resonate, but not too much; this is probably a quite subtle effect and this will probably just 'enrich' the sound somewhat. Probably the piano action will lift the dampers even in 'silent mode', so one will have also sympathetic resonance of the undamped strings, which will be noticeable, but not sound out of place when the digital signal is also a piano sound.

No, that's not right. In a real piano the thing vibrating is the string, and certainly not in a simple sine pattern. Also a short burst will not do the trick; if it did, damping the sound by placing a felt damper on the string wouldn't work. Physically speaking, the system of string(s) and sound board vibrates in a so-called eigenmode (or more correctly, in a quite complex superposition of eigenmodes). So the string and the resonator together produce the sound since they can vibrate freely. When using the transducer, the sound board would perform a so-called 'forced vibration', that is the result is completely determined by the transducer and thus the dgital waveform. In the forced scenario, resonances determine the (non-)linearity of the system, so they are not exactly unimportant, of course, and we still have the aforementioned sympathetic resonances of undamped strings.

Yes, the major contribution might just be that the sound would emanate from a wider field, recreating the sense of sitting at a real piano.

I don't know why it crossed my mind that sine waves would work. Of course not, since the strings are being circumvented. I wonder how the upright version will react to the various models in Pianoteq and for that matter, sample libraries. Clearly, its own physical qualities are going to constrain the sound. Vibrations from a Steinway D moved to a smaller sound board, with shorter strings vibrating sympathetically, creates what? So only upright libraries will sound best on it, and one would have to have the grand version for grand models and libraries?

Sorry - I'm not sure who made the above extracted quote - but I have a comment, based on my background in classical and jazz piano, on how the comment applies to the Bluthner model.

I agree with you that some acoustic pianos (especially those used in pop) sound bright and metallic. These qualities can be effective for pop, jazz, and even for certain classical music. However, many if not most of the finest classical concert pianos seldom sound shrill and ugly when they are used to play the standard repertoire, even if they can be made to sound bright and metallic. I do not expect the goal of modelling the Bluthner is to create solely a virtual pop music piano since there are already several other PT models which do that. The PT5  Bluthner is decidedly a major step forward from V4.5 for bass and mid range notes. However, based on my favorite preset so far (I prefer Bluthner under Stereo without mikes - this avoids the "recorded" sound - and pretty much copy the other settings given in the D4 Spacious preset, then add some PhoenixVerb reverb) some of the treble range is lacking in body and, often at high volumes, can sound a bit like a toy piano as others have pointed out. The treble does not compete with the bass and mid. I have had to revoice a couple of my compositions to avoid the treble range. Now, PT is by far the best virtual piano I have played - far better than Ivory in my opinion although I have no issue with others who disagree with me - but I think that if in a forthcoming PT5.5 the treble can made equal to the existing bass and mid, and the existing bass and mid left as they are, the Bluthner instrument will have reached an even higher level - a level at which it can just about compete with the real thing.

Right, we're not talking about banging here, we're talking about playing under very controlled conditions (i.e., 127 velocity layers under complete control of a DAW, even more than Rudolph Serkin used - he claimed he could consciously control about 32 volume levels, according to a Curtis-trained pianist I knew), and about a limited pitch range of a newer version (5) of PT Bluthner. I revoiced a couple pieces to a lower range using the same midi velocity levels as before revoicing and the problem went away.

You said "I'm not even a PT user but I love how mathematics can approximate reality",  then went on to make negative comments.   Just why did you make this post?

Ian

I think negative comments are useful. Its like an honest teacher preparing a student to stand alone. The blind test is the true state of affairs, since all pianos will sound different anyway.
Those notes at 1:37 sounded like a piano to me. When listening or reading about discussions on piano sounds, I've often wonder how we hear frequencies when we get older. Especially what we subject our hearing to.

Hi, I am returning to Pianoteq after not having used it for a few years. I upgraded to version 5 and can't get it to work on a brand new i7 laptop running windows 8. The emu 0404 doesn't seem to want to communicate. When I play the attached keyboard, nothing happens. If I mouse-click on the image of the keyboard on the pianoteq interface it does make a good sound, though. Oddly, on my very old centrino laptop running windows 7 I can play, but only for a few seconds - it starts cracking after a few big chords. Increasing the buffer seems to allow me to play (a bit) longer before the cracking starts, but in any case the lag is too great to make that a reasonable option. I tried adding asio4all but when I choose it in the pianoteq interface the only difference is that when I click on the keyboard image the sound emanates from the laptop's speakers rather than from the monitor attached to the emu 0404 and there's still no response when i actually play the physical keyboard.
Sorry for the rambling, but if anyone could suggest something to get my equipment to play nicely together, I'd be very grateful.

(I'm resurrecting this thread after running across it by accident while searching for something else.) Joshua, a thought occurs: is it possible that a new velocity curve or keyboard calibration would change your results? It is possible that you were naturally assuming that by keeping all of the other variables the same, the change in the model is only the change being heard in your files. But the new model could be more accurate, yet need other adjustments to achieve the desired result. Not trying to continue the argument here. Only noting a possibility.

But my real question is completely different: You mention the decay of an older Chickering, but I don't a mention of a Chickering earlier in this thread. Did I miss the reference, or were you alluding to another thread? I'm not making an academic argument about citations. I recently came into possession of a 1905 Chickering 116. I will not claim that its sustain is equal to that of a Steinway D, but even with old strings, it does have a good sustain. Part of the reason may be that what many people call Chickering baby grand are not all that small--they are a "parlour grand," which is about 6'5" long.

And of course I'm curious--who here has an old Chickering? I would like to compare impressions.

AlexS, I will add a similar view from someone who is trying to achieve the same thing with speakers next to my real piano.  And, as I type this note, I am away on vacation using my Microsoft Surface not with my upright 54" piano (would certainly bump the 50 pound weight limit), but a CME X-Keys 37 and a set of earbuds. 

From my experience, the presets sounds entirely different between earbuds, over-the-ear headphones, speakers pointed towards the player, speakers pointed towards the ceiling, speakers pointed towards each other under my piano's keyboard, etc.

In summary, the presets are extremely dependent on the sound production hardware, and no one at Modartt or even on this forum will likely be able to give you the perfect piano sound that you look for, unless they have both your physical setup as well as your ears and brain.  A variety of presets are available.  Try several until you find one that it close, and tweak from there.  For example, when using the Model B, "Prelude" sounds pretty good with my setup with speakers facing the ceiling and placed to each side of the piano, with the speaker elements out of direct earshot of my ears.  "Gentle" sounds too muffled.  Here on vacation using Alphatronix earbuds, "Prelude" sounds entirely too strident, while "Gentle" is entirely pleasant and playable.

One of the most ear-opening experiences I have had in this realm is visiting Randy's Piano Warehouse in Clearwater, Florida.  There, I got to go up and down the aisles playing the same little bits on literally dozens of used pianos of all makes, ages, sizes, and configurations.  They even had at least 4 Steinway Ms, and each sounded different in timbre from the others, as did the 2 Apollos, multiple Yamahas, Baldwins, etc.

David

Dear Fleer - in the meantime, use the Freeze Parameter set up page ( the little square box to the left of the word "Random" at the top of the main GUI) and then select  "Binaural settings" - Doing so will make all of the presets in Pianoteq play in the binaural mode -

Lanny