I would love to know what you guys think.... What model would you suggest?
I think it would be a great idea and one that would add a bit more diversity to the already excellent instruments that Modartt has.
I would love to see Pianoteq create some sort of theoretical synth model. Theoretical in the sense that it wouldn't need to model a particular existing synth (though that could be nice too), but instead it could start as something fairly pure, maybe just a sine wave, and then all the "physical" piano parameters would add to it. So rather than adjusting ADSR and applying electrical changes to modify the tone, you would still adjust things like hammer hardness, strike position, string length, soundboard impedance, etc. So basically modifying the sound in a more organic way, akin to building a physical instrument. Something like that would be totally unique as far as I know.
Pianoteq is very good, if not the best in the market. But there is still room for improvement. As long as it is like that, it would be a shame to concentrate on something else.
Or even just have another page where you could get even more creative with the pianos and turn them into synth type instruments, I think that would be a great little tool and it would be great for live as well. A bit like Keyscape and Omnisphere. Have Pianoteq as a live hub as well, meaning you can get creative on the fly as you play.
This may be taking things a little too far I know but it would be cool.
There are plenty of other great plugins that are virtual synths. Use those.
You can already mangle the piano sound in Pianoteq beyond recognition in Pianoteq PRO.
There are plenty of other great plugins that are virtual synths. Use those.
You can already mangle the piano sound in Pianoteq beyond recognition in Pianoteq PRO.
Yes, but they all work in the classic synth way of adjusting ADSR, envelopes, oscillations, etc... right? I've played around with a number of other programs, and none seem to come close to the satisfying UI of Pianoteq, and it's much harder to end up with a truly organic sounding and responsive instrument.
It's true Pianoteq allows for serious manipulation, which is fantastic. I think one step that could be taken to add versatility to what already exists, would be to allow manipulation of all parameters while sustaining a note. For example, play and hold a note, then adjust 'Q factor' or 'string length' to effect the sustained tone with an expression pedal. You can do this with everything under 'Output,' but it seems nothing above 'Output' is affected once a note has already sounded.
Just throwing out ideas here, but another thing that might have a lot of potential would be a version of Pianoteq, either an expansion of Pro, or another product entirely, where you could create your own instruments from scratch, rather than just tweaking existing instruments. "Instrument Maker"?? Something that would let you tap into the more fundamental aspects of Pianoteq, to go "under the hood."
EvilDragon wrote:There are plenty of other great plugins that are virtual synths. Use those.
You can already mangle the piano sound in Pianoteq beyond recognition in Pianoteq PRO.
Yes, but they all work in the classic synth way of adjusting ADSR, envelopes, oscillations, etc... right? I've played around with a number of other programs, and none seem to come close to the satisfying UI of Pianoteq, and it's much harder to end up with a truly organic sounding and responsive instrument.
It's true Pianoteq allows for serious manipulation, which is fantastic. I think one step that could be taken to add versatility to what already exists, would be to allow manipulation of all parameters while sustaining a note. For example, play and hold a note, then adjust 'Q factor' or 'string length' to effect the sustained tone with an expression pedal. You can do this with everything under 'Output,' but it seems nothing above 'Output' is affected once a note has already sounded.
Just throwing out ideas here, but another thing that might have a lot of potential would be a version of Pianoteq, either an expansion of Pro, or another product entirely, where you could create your own instruments from scratch, rather than just tweaking existing instruments. "Instrument Maker"?? Something that would let you tap into the more fundamental aspects of Pianoteq, to go "under the hood."
++ for a pianoteq pro extension option to go even further in parameterizing the model with more independence compared to existing instrument models (without competing with the economic model of the pianoteq instrument models).
Bruno
Yes, but they all work in the classic synth way of adjusting ADSR, envelopes, oscillations, etc... right?
Well, you gotta shape the sound somehow and in an easy to understand, intuitive manner. Everybody knows about oscillators and envelopes these days. But, there are some physical modeling synths like Sculpture (comes with Logic), for example. However there's non-subtractive synths out there, too... The choice is absolutely huge.
I've played around with a number of other programs, and none seem to come close to the satisfying UI of Pianoteq, and it's much harder to end up with a truly organic sounding and responsive instrument.
Not sure how deep you dug. But for example when you say "organic", I say you should check out Madrona Labs Aalto or Kaivo, u-he Zebra, Diva and Bazille, Camel Audio Alchemy, and any of ROLI's synths - they're great sounding and very, very expressive (particularly when paired with an MPE controller).
Agreed their are some great synths out there but I do feel that with the pianos Pianotea has got you get make some great synth type instruments out of them especially with some of the historical instruments....
Pianoteq, meet vocoder, using any other synth as carrier, with Pianoteq as modulator.
Not sure how deep you dug. But for example when you say "organic", I say you should check out Madrona Labs Aalto or Kaivo, u-he Zebra, Diva and Bazille, Camel Audio Alchemy, and any of ROLI's synths
Thanks for the suggestions. Prior to finding Pianoteq, for over a decade, I had periodically tried to break into the synthesizer world. As a classical musician, synthesizer interfaces have always been a bit foreign to me: based on patching and manipulating the flow of electricity in one way or another. It's logical since these were electronic instruments, but it's an entirely different world from acoustic instruments. I had looked into most of the software you mentioned, and much more (some of it might have come out later). A basic problem I found was that the way people made music with synthesizers in general was extremely different than how I made music. I have no use for arpeggiators, sequencers, creating soundscapes, etc. I was after something that could build a virtual instrument, in an intuitive way, ideally working in terms of physics/acoustics, rather than synth/electrical terms. I was interested in adjusting overtones directly, and relative to a range of dynamics/velocities.
When I first read about physical modeling I realized this was likely what I was looking for. But still, much of the physical modeling software focuses on electrical terminology... and many of the programs I found produced sounds not unlike Super Mario... The best seemed focused on making interesting new "sounds," rather than new "instruments." I was excited to find Pianoteq as it was almost exactly what I had imagined, far closer than anything else I've seen. To me, what really seems to set it apart, is the ease of making very responsive, expressive/musical, and dynamic instruments. By dynamic I'm specifically referring to the three "hammer hardness" sliders. Being able to quickly dial in the dark gentleness of a quiet note and the harsh brightness of a loud note is fantastic. It makes it so easy to breathe life into an instrument, no matter how wildly you've pushed other parameters. To me this is a large part of what makes acoustic instruments sound alive and "organic." Do any of the synth programs you mentioned allow for adjusting the dynamic expressiveness in a similar way? Perhaps there's a standard synth term for this? At one point I decided Reaktor was likely the only thing that would really do what I was looking for (including this "dynamic expressiveness"), but it's incredibly complex and didn't seem at all intuitive from a perspective of an acoustic musician, or acoustic instrument maker. Perhaps more for programmers and less for musicians?
Using virtual patch cables and oscillators is likely nice for vintage synthesizer enthusiasts, but for building a virtual, acoustic-inspired instrument, it doesn't seem like a logical interface.
At one point I decided Reaktor was likely the only thing that would really do what I was looking for (including this "dynamic expressiveness"), but it's incredibly complex and didn't seem at all intuitive from a perspective of an acoustic musician, or acoustic instrument maker. Perhaps more for programmers and less for musicians?
Reaktor is for both types of people you mention. If you want to build your stuff, you gotta know your DSP. But then there's a bajillion things available for free in Reaktor user library, including physically modelled instruments (check out Chet Singer's ensembles)...
Do any of the synth programs you mentioned allow for adjusting the dynamic expressiveness in a similar way? Perhaps there's a standard synth term for this?
Synths with good/great modulation options will let you modulate a lot of things with whatever sound sources - velocity, keyboard tracking, MIDI CCs... and then remap/rescale those modulators in various ways (so that they don't modulate in a linear 1:1 fashion). Then there are synths that allow you to shape the parameter using multi-segment envelope generators, which are a LOT more flexible than ADSR envelopes. Zebra is a prime example of such a synth. It's extremely expressive. And if it's good enough for Hans Zimmer (he mentions it's the ONLY virtual synth that holds its own in the mix against hardware synths, and translates perfectly to a huge IMAX sound system), it's good enough for anyone.
You've heard ZebraHZ in The Dark Knight, if you watched it (but also a number of other HZ scored movies).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rBMb2oijyo
Thanks, I'll have to look into Chet Singer's stuff.
One other aspect that I think really sets Pianoteq apart is the fact that its main goal is to physically model instruments as realistically as possible, and they seem to be leading the way in this regard. Because of this, it means if you do want to heavily modify an instrument to create something entirely different, you are starting with an incredibly detailed, responsive, subtle, yet highly sophisticated engine. So it's that much easier to end up with a very convincing, "organic," and musical instrument... even if realism isn't your goal. That alone is a massive head start.
I haven't seen The Dark Knight. But what Hans Zimmer does is very much different than this specific goal of mine with creating virtual instruments. Zimmer's main priority is in creating soundtracks, effectively recordings, rather than instruments meant to be played live. Based on that video, it sounds like he's using synths to create soundscapes and musical backgrounds. Sometimes the timbre gradually changes as the patterns repeat, perhaps by turning a knob here or there. For that, I can imagine Zebra or similar would be ideal. Zebra was in my top 5 list before I found Pianoteq. With all synth software, I really haven't seen an example of someone trying to create a dynamically responsive instrument, for the sole purpose of playing the instrument as one would play a piano, or a violin for example. Not to say no one is doing that, but if so I'd love to know.
There are some musicians who use synthesizers a bit more like traditional instruments... I'm thinking some prog rock keyboardists. But even here their synth instruments are much closer to pipe organs/harpsichords than to more "nuanced" instruments like pianos. I'm not talking about the timbre of the instruments, as synths can sound like anything (or unlike anything), but instead I'm talking about the dynamic qualities of an instrument. That's something which is so easy and intuitive to manipulate with Pianoteq.
It's hard to describe this concept in words...
Anyway, to get back to the OP, I think if Pianoteq were to model a synthesizer, their approach would be completely unique. Modeling a synthesizer from the perspective of a company that models acoustic instruments could be fascinating, and might open some new doors.
Should Pianoteq model a synth? Well, I think I have said this before, but after 7 years here, in my opinion Modartt have found their place in the sun (a position of success and happiness). My pupils wanted to do their own things at a speed that was comfortable for them, in own pace. Modartt like physically modelled pianos, it is mainly the thing for them, to do at a comfortable/ideal speed. We can give them ideas on everything and a gentle push every now and the to help them keep the enthusiasm. But, I hope they keep going with the main thing, modelling pianos. It’s not good to concentrate/split on many things at the same time. It would require more resources, and less time to develop/improve pianos.
Well, that’s what I think about it. And I hope that we one day can see a Fazioli :-)
As EvilDragon says, there are plenty of other companies doing very good synths. Nobody else does pianos quite like Modartt, so I think they should concentrate their efforts on refining existing models and finding new types of piano to model. However, I've often thought that if the soundboard impedance could be expanded to 'infinity' that would allow for the creation of all sorts of interesting synthy pad sounds.
Pushing impedance to the extreme does give a very long sustain, but yes, infinity could be nice. I think similar small additions could go a long way in opening up a huge amount of flexibility, like for instance being able to change parameters above the "output" section while sustaining notes, as mentioned earlier. I won't beat a dead horse about how a company like Modartt is in such a unique position for approaching synth modelling
I understand the worry that spreading too wide could slow development of Pianoteq's pianos. In the case of modeling other physical instruments, in theory, it should only help them gain insight into physical modeling in general, which could translate into better piano modeling. Would it be similar with synth modeling? Impossible to say looking at it from the outside, I suppose I could see it going either way.
Interesting, I just stumbled upon a recent article by Roger Linn about physical modeling. Towards the end he touches on almost exactly the issue I've been trying to describe: https://synthandsoftware.com/2019/11/th...-modeling/
As an illustration of the point that a lot can be done with Pianoteq beyond the timbres its presets offer, the track below was made entirely with transformations and edits of Pianoteq’s Harp patches. Nothing else. Using tons of Pianoteq’s built-in FX-processors as well of course. But no other sound-sources or sound-mangling plug-ins where used; everything in this track is in one way or another derived from the Harp and generated within Pianoteq.
I can’t recall the details, but I do remember that the only non-Pianoteq processing I used was the DSM Dynamic Spectrum Mapper (which is a sort of three-band ‘spectrum interpreter’ + dynamiq EQ + compressor, although that simplistic description does it gross unjustice) and a limiter to keep things from clipping.
The thing is 5 years old (it was made soon after the Harp was first introduced) and the production is not how I would do it today — terrible mix, I find, when I listen back to it today —, but the excercise was, and still is, all about pushing Pianoteq’s soundsculpting possibilities to their limits. There’s a lot of sonic territory there that remains unexplored.
_
Applied Acoustics Systems (AAS) has already a few synthesizers modeled. It has even synthesizers of modelled strings and some percussion! And, you play with the dynamic attacks of any of those instrument models you construct.
I’ve linked AAS and its MODELING COLLECTION PROFESSIONAL SERIES BUNDLE.
Mainly now, about this Harp Transformed, I liked it! Although to me it had sound neither mangled nor organic, positively. It was impressive and as good as ever anything I’d heard from The Dark Zebra YouTube post (above) —if not better.
Technically, out of all the other instruments modelled in PIANOTEQ, harps are the only string instruments. The rest of the modeled are percussion!
While keeping in the percussion category, the software conceivably might evolve er progress from an xylophone, steelpans, and vibes into a fully modern set of drums someday. Finally, then I may view posts from fellow drummers backing my play —at this forum frequented darn near exclusively by keyboardists and piano players (pianists) alike.
Man, do I ever have a drum to beat!
... However, I've often thought that if the soundboard impedance could be expanded to 'infinity' that would allow for the creation of all sorts of interesting synthy pad sounds.
i like this idea a lot. in fact i would like extreme values available for all parameters. of course being able to plug in outrageous values for parameters takes the software far away from piano modelling. since some don't behave linearly (afaik, don't know the details of the model), it might not be useful to have extreme values available all the time. but it would be great fun to get to try this out.
maybe there could be a global switch, like with an icon depicting the character in Edvard Munch's _The Scream_, that flips the interface into extreme mode.
Applied Acoustics Systems (AAS) might have just what you want!
Just three (3) of its instrument modeling synths alone allow a musician to build his own new and unique musical instrument, be it string based, percussion based, or a synthesis of analog gear and a combination of all three —in separate plugin instances, within your DAW of course:
String Studio VS-3, with it I may create anything —whether or not either bowed or plucked— from a cello, guitar, a combination of the both and even my very own acoustic pianos modeled inside the software.
Chromaphone 2, I use it to build percussion instruments, like drums and polyphonic instruments such as vibes and steel drums. Definitely, with this software one might mangle those beyond any recognition, if you’re really into that sort of a thing!
Ultra Analog VA-3, this one I need to upgrade from its previous version. It allows musical expression from your own versions of analog synthesizer gear. Which any inside the software might build!
All three support the Scala scale file format as well as reference note frequency tunings to microtonal music.
While Ultra Analog VA-3 boasts four (4) performance macros per layer that respond to user-defined MIDI controls, its sound generation features modulation, timbre, envelope, and effect morphing assignments played in real time.
String Studio VS-3, compared to Ultra Analog VA-3, has only two (2) performance modulators per layer that respond to user-defined MIDI controls, with also some of the same sound generation features as Ultra Analog VA-3, played in real time.
I’ve included within this post three of the three’s (3) introductory videos:
I really do feel MODARTT as a true modelling organization might now continue to do well, to stick solely to a truly impressive expertise in modelled percussion of actual physical instruments. By such, it might increase its market share that is already in percussion!
maybe there could be a global switch, like with an icon depicting the character in Edvard Munch's _The Scream_, that flips the interface into extreme mode.
I absolutely love that idea!
As an illustration of the point that a lot can be done with Pianoteq beyond the timbres its presets offer, the track below was made entirely with transformations and edits of Pianoteq’s Harp patches. Nothing else. Using tons of Pianoteq’s built-in FX-processors as well of course. But no other sound-sources or sound-mangling plug-ins where used; everything in this track is in one way or another derived from the Harp and generated within Pianoteq.
I can’t recall the details, but I do remember that the only non-Pianoteq processing I used was the DSM Dynamic Spectrum Mapper (which is a sort of three-band ‘spectrum interpreter’ + dynamiq EQ + compressor, although that simplistic description does it gross unjustice) and a limiter to keep things from clipping.
The thing is 5 years old (it was made soon after the Harp was first introduced) and the production is not how I would do it today — terrible mix, I find, when I listen back to it today —, but the excercise was, and still is, all about pushing Pianoteq’s soundsculpting possibilities to their limits. There’s a lot of sonic territory there that remains unexplored.
_
Piet, you are a real magician, I didn't know such sounds could come out of the tweaked harp! The burst at 0:29 is very impressive!
Yes that is very impressive how far you pushed the harp Piet.
budo, I really like that "global switch" idea for an extreme mode too, particularly if it allows sustained note manipulation. I feel like many of the parameters can be pushed to extreme levels, but there are some that could certainly go further. It seems especially difficult to push the highest notes into extreme sonic territories.
Amen, yes I remember looking into Chromaphone years back, I'll have to check back in with AAS and see what improvements have been made since then.
To the options presented above, I would like to add another cool project:
(Also France!)
They embody a very interesting idea. Although this is difficult and requires some skills, it has a direct naturalness. Sound synthesis according to the laws of our world. The synthesizer is assembled from a number of vibrating parts and the connections between them. Very good!
To the options presented above, I would like to add another cool project:
(Also France!)
They embody a very interesting idea. Although this is difficult and requires some skills, it has a direct naturalness. Sound synthesis according to the laws of our world. The synthesizer is assembled from a number of vibrating parts and the connections between them. Very good!
That's fascinating stuff, thanks for the link.
As an illustration of the point that a lot can be done with Pianoteq beyond the timbres its presets offer, the track below was made entirely with transformations and edits of Pianoteq’s Harp patches. Nothing else. Using tons of Pianoteq’s built-in FX-processors as well of course. But no other sound-sources or sound-mangling plug-ins where used; everything in this track is in one way or another derived from the Harp and generated within Pianoteq.
_
Very nice indeed.
Modartt: maybe an idea to have a page on the website with examples of exotic sounds (can be like this one from Piet, but also 'extreme' piano sounds). To give people an idea how versatile PTQ is. Despite from being a very good piano instrument software. This could open into a market of musicians playing midi keyboard, who are not (initially) looking for a realistic piano sound, but more software-synth like possibilities, based on virtual models of real acoustic instruments.
Also, users can have their FXP presets that they used on the website.
And since PTQ already is able to produce sounds like this, it doesn't need to be first implemented by Modartt more or less from scratch.
There are some great discussions here and I am absolutely fascinated with what I see and hear.
At the end of the day a lot people use tools for prepared pianos, and I suppose Modartt could incorporate something like that.
I really do think this could open some great opportunities for Modartt. Of course first and foremost acoustic pianos but at the same time how many acoustic pianos do we actually need until it becomes overwhelming.
I really do think a separate page where you can really experiment would be a great idea and as someone said a great way for the developers to understand just how far they push the technology.
Modartt: maybe an idea to have a page on the website with examples of exotic sounds (can be like this one from Piet, but also 'extreme' piano sounds). To give people an idea how versatile PTQ is.
+1 for this idea. in general, i love seeing cool mods done by PTQ experts and hearing about their processes. i have some awesome FXPs by Piet for the Rhodes Mark II that are absolutely insane. would love to have more.
Maybe organteq can go a little bit towards a synth sound......
Hope also that it can be played by a wind controller and have the same microtonality features as pianoteq........
looking forward for the release.......
Synths, especially very old ones, are extremely simple for today standarts of digital technoloy. It would be simple to pianoteq model a synth, and some people would think it would be very affordable. But perhaps the major cost would be more the research abouth synths, get the data banks and the basic customize each one had. And it would require a pack of many modeled synths and not just one or two, to get attention of possible customers. In the end the need o research many old synths and adapt to modeled, with vintage customize plus the pianoteq extra customize, could end in a relatively costy project targeting a market of limited people with taste for retro (vintage) sounds.
Unless I'm wrong...
There’s a lot of sonic territory there that remains unexplored
Hat's off for that exploration Piet, I love the piece it is stunning.
It so clearly demonstrates how Pianoteq can be used like a synth.
These days it's 'Pianoteq first' when looking for interesting sounds which I used to go-to synths for. The natural playability (even with very warped settings) is part of the picture, but also the more natural timbres, even as settings make it less piano or harp-like, there's still sonic 'truth' in the complexity. Anyway - Bellissimo! the weekend is more enjoyable, thanks.
relatively costy project targeting a market of limited people
I think you nailed that. Already there's a VST for any synth you can imagine and a lot of DAWs come with free synths or inexpensive ones are quite amazing (and I have too many, and you get to know the things you want from each). Pianoteq's real strength I think lies in, like the music Piet posted, more genuine relation to reality we hear from the model.
The way I see it, I wouldn't require more synths - but definitely the reality based model plus interesting parameters allowing us to 'break this normal universe' is a particularly strong nexus for experimental music.
I encourage musicians who have not yet done so, to try Pianoteq in this way - and encourage Modartt to keep on doing what they do so well! (with a few toys here and there for creatives).
Piet Copperfield. :-)
Remambers Wendy Carlos's Timesteps (part of A Clockwork Orange's soundtrack):
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x14rnic
Some information about the way it was created : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3cab5IcCy8
Very vintage synth:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usl_TvIFtG0
As an illustration of the point that a lot can be done with Pianoteq beyond the timbres its presets offer, the track below was made entirely with transformations and edits of Pianoteq’s Harp patches. Nothing else. Using tons of Pianoteq’s built-in FX-processors as well of course. But no other sound-sources or sound-mangling plug-ins where used; everything in this track is in one way or another derived from the Harp and generated within Pianoteq.
I can’t recall the details, but I do remember that the only non-Pianoteq processing I used was the DSM Dynamic Spectrum Mapper (which is a sort of three-band ‘spectrum interpreter’ + dynamiq EQ + compressor, although that simplistic description does it gross unjustice) and a limiter to keep things from clipping.
The thing is 5 years old (it was made soon after the Harp was first introduced) and the production is not how I would do it today — terrible mix, I find, when I listen back to it today —, but the excercise was, and still is, all about pushing Pianoteq’s soundsculpting possibilities to their limits. There’s a lot of sonic territory there that remains unexplored.
_
I am not a fan of synths myself but I think Modartt can explore the idea. There are certain iconic piano synths that could be modelled by Pianoteq (I am thinking of the MKS 20, JD800). Since we already have EPs there is no concrete reasons why the historical follow-ups should not have a place in the software as well. I would find the idea superb to complete the piano evolution along the centuries and square the circle. Food for thought.
I am not a fan of synths myself
Pianoteq is a synthesizer. It is a testament to the program's greatness that we don't think of it as such. I'm being pedantic though, we all know what you mean.I wouldn't expect classic synthesizers to be reproduced within the Pianoteq program.
...but I think Modartt can explore the idea. There are certain iconic piano synths that could be modelled by Pianoteq (I am thinking of the MKS 20, JD800). Since we already have EPs there is no concrete reasons why the historical follow-ups should not have a place in the software as well. I would find the idea superb to complete the piano evolution along the centuries and square the circle. Food for thought.
Personally I would prefer that they stick to mechanical electric pianos, acoustic pianos and perhaps other percussive instruments within Pianoteq. If Modartt was to use physical modelling within a separate program that could be cool too.
However it might be cool to have a collection of fictional acoustic pianos unrestrained by the intention to recreate the real world pianos warts 'n' all.
When a synth evolve a lot, it can became Indistinguishable from reality.
Perhaps synth modeling would make a good off-shoot of Pianoteq. Similar to how Modart has begun work on "Organteq" as a separate project, I think any synth modeling would be awesome, but only if it didn't interfere with Pianoteq itself.
When a synth evolve a lot, it can became Indistinguishable from reality.
I know as somebody who has played inside several orchestras, I’ve tried over and over to rationalize the presence of the harps, since they are no percussion instruments at all unlike the others that are!
But, harps are the historic forerunners to the pianos. Besides, if you could play them from the unlimited possibilities the preset (modified) that's Piet’s demo seems to demonstrate, and have an especial ear for the avant-garde, you’ll timely get the sometime wanted impression of someone standing at his piano and strumming its harp tastefully in the musical performance, after a little bit of work beforehand within your copy of PIANOTEQ PRO of course.
I really do think this could open some great opportunities for Modartt. Of course first and foremost acoustic pianos but at the same time how many acoustic pianos do we actually need until it becomes overwhelming.
As long as serious musicians are needing to arrange their orchestrations at grand pianos that are in demand like a Shigeru Kawai SK-EX and Fazioli, and because a market for such exists, MODARTT might have every reason to meet that demand by new and improved models that are also affordable and portable —much unlike the real things.
I’m just maybe hoping no American made Steinway and Baldwin are left out somehow.
Oh, a word about MODARTT possible projects from the viewpoint of a forum member only, it might do well, as I am of the opinion, if it —by a relatively small staff and little resources— just models instead of some synth, a Kawai CR-40A transparent grand piano. It can do it in a timely fashion, since it requires no Kawai trademark naming it officially and since everybody clearly can identify easily it, without the brand name, the transparent piano it is.
There are many advantages to the transparent piano project ostensible:
MODARTT maintains its own transparency just like it did before and since it got its Steinway and Sons authorizations.
Kawai also keeps its own and distinct reputation it has enjoyed worldwide and as a world renowned manufacturer of fine instruments —in isolation, and on an island.
Generally, the struggling artists who are too poor to afford the expensive grand while they enjoy its sound, can have access to such a treasured tone and find it surprisingly affordable.
A major player and potential competitor has yet to sample successfully any transparent instrument making a VST.
The most inconspicuous of developers who model pianos is likely to have a proverbial foot in the door cordially opened to all of them only to enter eventually into an agreement on a much anticipated and highly sought after Shigeru Kawai SK-EX model.
Once competitors will have impressed each other, greatly. Diplomacy among the industry rivals will ensue. Befitting all, it’ll appear to paying customers!
A potentially useful outcome to piano players might result as Kawai can start to implement a MIDI resolution higher than that standard MIDI permits inside its controller and finally access to all of PIANOTEQ capabilities.
Kawai has advertised its CR-40A as having: “Incomparable beauty with quality tone.”
I personally would love to see Modartt model a Kawaii Shigeru, they are my favourite pianos by a far distance bit even with the transparent piano I just do not see Kawaii allowing it unfortunately.
Should Pianoteq model a Synth?
Yes, I'd love if they model the famous KORG Z1 or Trinity V3 MOSS Board....
Should Pianoteq model another Pianos?
Yes, Yamaha CFX, Kawai SK-EX and Doutreligne pianos.
So, guys this thread now amounts to phrases, should of, could of, and would of!
Shigeru Kawai was one of the best pianos I've had the pleasure to play and I bought my MP11 controller because it really gave me a sense of it (though different to a degree). That's partly a buying decision caused by Pianoteq reaching version 3 levels of usability coupled with the keys. So a Shigeru Kawai piano would be wonderful - but I'm also with the idea of a lot of other good pianos too like the Bösendorfer so would be happy for any good piano manufacturers to jump on in to the library for all of history to keep.
My first synth had a spongy no-action clicky keyboard, it was mono-phonic and all expression happened in real time by controlling knobs and sliders/switches.
That's the main issue I'd have with Pianoteq getting into modeling already well covered tech (they are simpler wave forms in genesis - becoming more complex with processing and more exciting with real time conrtols or automation). At present, with a digital piano controller, a lot of users will not have a mod wheel, or limited controls anyway - but.. it's still interesting to consider.. even if just because it's a third gen leap from making real sounds into digital ones, to making digital sounds real ;0)
So for that alone I'd be less crazy about a synth from the past getting modeled - but still would certainly be interested to see play it, if it happened - and would likely buy it - and likely it would blow me away too..
but I like using Pianoteq to replace synths anyway (Piet's posted piece is such a good demo for that kind of thing) - so from my perspective, an offshoot product by Modartt which is a complete modern music creation kit based on parameters gleaned from the creation of Pianoteq could be more of 'a thing' to my way of thinking. It could change names of parameters, make them even wider from reality, blend with conventional and unconventional analogs from the scene and that would seem like something I'd love to buy. Others on the market in that area don't yet excite me (unless tied to a controller type I don't wish to have to buy and so on) - but something about the way Pianoteq knows conventional keyboards and pushes the air around does.
If it persists, this whole business (idea) about a synth, seems with its knobs a more logical choice possibly in Organtec, than appropriately inside Pianoteq —if somebody within MODARTT is going to do it anyway!
Perhaps the first even lacked a keyboard!
I am not a fan of synths myself but I think Modartt can explore the idea. There are certain iconic piano synths that could be modelled by Pianoteq (I am thinking of the MKS 20, JD800). Since we already have EPs there is no concrete reasons why the historical follow-ups should not have a place in the software as well. I would find the idea superb to complete the piano evolution along the centuries and square the circle. Food for thought.
I would love to know what you guys think.....
Short answer : no.
Modelling acoustic instruments is what pianoteq does and especially piano-like instruments. Modeling electronics is an entirely different ball game and a very red ocean.
I would like pianoteq to work on MPE playability. Imagine a pianomodel that responds to everything expressive E Osmose can do!
I would also be interested in surround sound. Especially for the organ-teq.
Applied Acoustics Systems (AAS) might have just what you want!
Just three (3) of its instrument modeling synths alone allow a musician to build his own new and unique musical instrument, be it string based, percussion based, or a synthesis of analog gear and a combination of all three —in separate plugin instances, within your DAW of course:
String Studio VS-3, with it I may create anything —whether or not either bowed or plucked— from a cello, guitar, a combination of the both and even my very own acoustic pianos modeled inside the software.
Chromaphone 2, I use it to build percussion instruments, like drums and polyphonic instruments such as vibes and steel drums. Definitely, with this software one might mangle those beyond any recognition, if you’re really into that sort of a thing!
Ultra Analog VA-3, this one I need to upgrade from its previous version. It allows musical expression from your own versions of analog synthesizer gear. Which any inside the software might build!
Just wanted to say, this thread (and a significant Black Friday discount) just sold me a bundle of all the AAS modeling instruments.
That's on top of PianoTeq Studio, and OrganTeq. So, while I'd love to see some extended controls in here, my needs are probably met for a while!
Heya @greaterthenzero,
welcome to the Pianoteq Studio Bundle owner club
It's the best investment I've made in my musical kit without a shadow of doubt.
Cheers!
Although I am sure PTQ would come up with a great Synth, I would prefer to stick with modelling of real instruments. How about a decent Classic Rock Organ, Hammond B3 or similar.That would be top of my wish list.
If MODARTT is ever going to synthesize or properly model a Kawai CR-40A or even someday its own version of a Shigeru Kawai SK-EX model, Kawai has to firstly get its stuff together. It grossly lacks any affordable keyboard that is High Resolution MIDI Velocity (CC#88) capable. (See forum topic {High Resolution MIDI Velocity (CC#88)} and particularly my post in it.) It seems that none of the Kawai keyboards from its current lineup can exploit or take advantage of PIANOTEQ software fully. That which can translate as an optional dialect either Hi-res CC#88 or Disklavier XP (via the software Dialect choices in its Options pane). Although apparently Kawai sells its MIDI controller VPC1 with an included velocity curve intended specifically for PIANOTEQ users.
It is as though it maybe has already embraced an agreement with MODARTT in part at least while it might take a staunch stance still against any proliferation of Hi-res CC#88 or Disklavier XP that as a format potentially can flood markets now, and, as soon as the new format MIDI 2.0 becomes released officially! Its notable transition from ivory keys sold on acoustic pianos into modern plasticky digitals is like a mash of gerbil too unsavory for most customers to grasp fully or consume anything about it or its underpinnings. (See forum topic: Kawai VPC1 faulty key weighting.)
Have some of you witnessed anything from Kawai at NAMM that touches on Hi-res CC#88 or MIDI 2.0 general acceptance?
Personally, I'm more than just marginally ecstatic about the re-release from Roland Corporation that has recently announced the Roland A-88MKII. Along with its MIDI 2.0 capability, this keyboard controller might allow me to play virtually at the Kawai CR-40A or Kawai SK-EX —just as if I were someone seated at one of the real pianos unlimited by the quantized restraints you experience with standard MIDI, and, if ever PIANOTEQ should model either!
I'm not sure you're on the same topic as the rest of us.
If Modartt were to use their physical modeling technology to extend further beyond the capabilities of a traditional piano, they wouldn't be emulating *specific* synths, much less locking themselves into the MIDI constraints imposed by a particular model.