Being a big fan of Pianoteq , I wonder when version 9 is going to be released and what innovations are going to be included . We can only speculate at this point .
As a reference version 6 was released in 2017
Version 7 in 2020
Version 8 in 2022
Last 2 versions were on 2 years dev cycle. So potentially , v9 could be with us as his year .
Thoughts ?
If we suppose that the version and launching date are linearly correlated (a very strong and dubious supposition), we get that we'll have to wait for a while:
What will it include?
We don't know, some AI stuff? It's the trend now
New version I don't think... But New grand piano, why not. The last one is the Mistral (2021 I believe).
It's Time for a Fazioli... For exemple...
Absolutely no idea really. I doubt 9 is coming any time soon. Not until tail end of '25 anyway.
Non of this probably:
At some point we could have dedicated uprights per each of these current manufacturers instead of generic U4?
-not that there's anything wrong with current U4.
A more comprehensive microphone setup system.
Electric piano models taken to the next level with modelled suitcase cabinet options and new suite of FX with graphics (for people with that buy with their eyes as much as their ears).
Dedicated hall impulse responses of named famous halls and venues (again might help with marketing).
More realistic rendered GUI graphics of instruments in rooms.
GPU processing option - possibly just for 3d spacial depth IR related tasks, possibly more.
A new modern grand piano.
More quirky modern treated sounds like tacked pianos (electric and acoustic) added to all modern keyboard models.
A ukulele model!
None of the above, who knows!
Version 8 is so good (has reached such a high level of achieving an ideal, in my opinion) that I don't really care.
Version 8 is so good (has reached such a high level of achieving an ideal, in my opinion) that I don't really care.
I totally agree with Stephen. Ever since 8 was released and I upgraded to the full bundle, I have had found nothing left on my wish list.
I would certainly welcome any additions or refinements, but I can be completely satisfied with the current version for a very long time.
Version 8 is so good (has reached such a high level of achieving an ideal, in my opinion) that I don't really care.
I totally agree with Stephen. Ever since 8 was released and I upgraded to the full bundle, I have had found nothing left on my wish list.
I would certainly welcome any additions or refinements, but I can be completely satisfied with the current version for a very long time.
Version 8 is brilliant - so was 7, 6, and 5 - I don't go back any further but yes version 8 with 8.2 feels like another game changer. Not looking to stifle innovation while respecting the brilliant product we already have.
If this was the last version I reckon it would probably remain my go to piano engine for many years, nothing else currently comes close for what I want from piano software. Obviously they can still innovate and improve the product though. Sure the law of diminishing returns bites hard at some point, the software is already that good.
Stephen_Doonan wrote:Version 8 is so good (has reached such a high level of achieving an ideal, in my opinion) that I don't really care.
wonner wrote:I totally agree with Stephen. Ever since 8 was released and I upgraded to the full bundle, I have had found nothing left on my wish list.
I would certainly welcome any additions or refinements, but I can be completely satisfied with the current version for a very long time.
Version 8 is brilliant - so was 7, 6, and 5 - I don't go back any further but yes version 8 with 8.2 feels like another game changer. Not looking to stifle innovation while respecting the brilliant product we already have.
If this was the last version I reckon it would probably remain my go to piano engine for many years, nothing else currently comes close for what I want from piano software. Obviously they can still innovate and improve the product though. Sure the law of diminishing returns bites hard at some point, the software is already that good.
The last bastion seems to be better bass modelling - apparently that’s more CPU-heavy. But if they model a Bösendorfer Imperial then it may be needed.
Please vote:
Are you in favor of a quite more CPU demandaing version variation of pianoteq, to get more sound details/texture, or do you prefer CPU demanding to keep around average CPU personal computer.
1-Yes, I prefer a more CPU intensive.
2-No, I want CPU demands to stay around average personal computer.
Please vote:
Are you in favor of a quite more CPU demandaing version variation of pianoteq, to get more sound details/texture, or do you prefer CPU demanding to keep around average CPU personal computer.
1-Yes, I prefer a more CPU intensive.
2-No, I want CPU demands to stay around average personal computer.
I’d just like to see the sound continue to make noticeable improvements. I suspect that one of the “easiest” ways to do this would be to add more complexity to the model used in the software, which as you imply would require more from the computer’s CPU.
I wonder if Modartt is holding that in their back pocket, so to speak, getting enough improvement for each new version to justify the price of upgrading through whatever makes the most sense at that moment in time. It may well be that this is what they’re doing now; adding in a few more details from their “perfect” (and very time consuming and not real-time capable) model every few years, spacing them out as it makes sense for them. This would also allow them to slowly use a more complex and demanding model every few years as the average computer/tablet/phone power improves.
I could easily answer 1-yes but I won't because I know I am an outlier with a beast of a desktop computer and my entire music production system is simply one instance of Pianoteq and notation software.
Modartt will have to answer this based on the average compute power of their user base. But given that Pianoteq is physically modeled, it would guess they can do quite a bit with a relatively modest increase in system resources.
It's come up before but an offline rendering mode with a more complex model that doesn't need to work in real time might be another solution.
I think the problem/s for Modartt would be getting over to the customers that that was not the end of the line for the real time processing potential, that they had not hit the hard ceiling. Also it could become a constant irritant for them if people were asking year upon year for the real-time performance to match something like the offline version. So even if the engine works this way and can have a more complex offline version they may not want to do this from a marketing perspective.
Similarly if there was a better quality real time mode available only to the customers with the most powerful CPUs that would not ingratiate them to a lot of customers, and put some people off.
Customers might also be disappointed if the offline or ultra high quality version/s hardly made any difference.
With such considerations in mind I can imagine this is why we have never seen ultra CPU intensive modes. They could be a gift for the naysayers too. imagine the comments - "look it has to be rendered offline to sound any good!"
There will always be prejudiced people who cannot comprehend how it comes to be so good, however much CPU muscle is required to produce the absolute best results.
Sampling based products being a set of recordings is so much easier for people to get their head around. I think it's almost offensive to some people to imagine something of such great sonic beauty and complexity being reduced to an elegant mathematical program.
Please vote:
Are you in favor of a quite more CPU demandaing version variation of pianoteq, to get more sound details/texture, or do you prefer CPU demanding to keep around average CPU personal computer.
1-Yes, I prefer a more CPU intensive.
2-No, I want CPU demands to stay around average personal computer.
It is a tough call given part of the success of Pianoteq is their ability to run on very low specs computers, like the Raspberry PI devices. Maybe a light/full version or the ability to select advanced modelling functions in the preference menu could be an option. I would personally vote 2.
Beto-Music wrote:Please vote:
Are you in favor of a quite more CPU demandaing version variation of pianoteq, to get more sound details/texture, or do you prefer CPU demanding to keep around average CPU personal computer.
1-Yes, I prefer a more CPU intensive.
2-No, I want CPU demands to stay around average personal computer.It is a tough call given part of the success of Pianoteq is their ability to run on very low specs computers, like the Raspberry PI devices. Maybe a light/full version or the ability to select advanced modelling functions in the preference menu could be an option. I would personally vote 2.
To be fair his proposal is not instead of what we have now but a CPU intensive variation as well as the regular CPU friendly mode. Nonetheless I think this would be difficult for all the reasons I outlined in my post above.
I imagine this trade-off has been a consideration from the outset. The aim was always to make a playable instrument for the maximum amount of potential users. The trade off is remarkably impressive today.
So the considerations have to be:
1) why mess with the formula when it's so incredibly close to the real thing in real time already.
2) why not push for the potential for even better sound for those who want the absolute best (and can pay for it) now that the modelling works so incredibly well on modest hardware in real-time?
It could be risky throwing an unnecessary spanner in the works when it's working so well.
Pianistically wrote:Beto-Music wrote:Please vote:
Are you in favor of a quite more CPU demandaing version variation of pianoteq, to get more sound details/texture, or do you prefer CPU demanding to keep around average CPU personal computer.
1-Yes, I prefer a more CPU intensive.
2-No, I want CPU demands to stay around average personal computer.It is a tough call given part of the success of Pianoteq is their ability to run on very low specs computers, like the Raspberry PI devices. Maybe a light/full version or the ability to select advanced modelling functions in the preference menu could be an option. I would personally vote 2.
To be fair his proposal is not instead of what we have now but a CPU intensive variation as well as the regular CPU friendly mode. Nonetheless I think this would be difficult for all the reasons I outlined in my post above.
I imagine this trade-off has been a consideration from the outset. The aim was always to make a playable instrument for the maximum amount of potential users. The trade off is remarkably impressive today.
So the considerations have to be:
1) why mess with the formula when it's so incredibly close to the real thing in real time already.
2) why not push for the potential for even better sound for those who want the absolute best (and can pay for it) now that the modelling works so incredibly well on modest hardware in real-time?It could be risky throwing an unnecessary spanner in the works when it's working so well.
IMHO, the pianoteq version in 10 years time will be even more realistic than what was is available today . We have a tendency to evaluate the future based on the technology we have today . There is no comparison with version 8,2 we have today with version 4 released a few years back and thanks god, there is no technical reason to believe that modelling has reached its apogee in 2024 . I believe it is just the beginning of a fantastic journey and in a future ( I don’t when) , I am convinced it will be very hard if not impossible to distinguish a recording made with an acoustic piano vs a recording produced by modelling technology , but as much as I love pianoteq , it is not the case today .
So long as they hold the passion for this unique product its all good.
Nobody has implied otherwise. It's bound to keep getting even closer for as long as the current development team stay true to the product - no sign of let up so far.
Unlike some companies Modartt hasn't been sold or sold out out to some stack 'em high sell 'em cheap umbrella corporation. I hope they don't all end up somehow owned by Disney's not so Mickey Mouse operation!!!
So long as they hold the passion for this unique product its all good.
Nobody has implied otherwise. It's bound to keep getting even closer for as long as the current development team stay true to the product - no sign of let up so far.Unlike some companies Modartt hasn't been sold or sold out out to some stack 'em high sell 'em cheap umbrella corporation. I hope they don't all end up somehow owned by Disney's not so Mickey Mouse operation!!!
These are the reason, why i bought the entire Studio package and I will not hesitate a second to invest in a next paid update. I love making (piano)music - just for my own though - and Pianoteq is the most fascinating opportunity to play all my favourite pianos.
Male den Teufel nicht an die Wand - do not invite trouble - we do not want to have it a Disney corporate product ;-)
Key Fumbler wrote:So long as they hold the passion for this unique product its all good.
Nobody has implied otherwise. It's bound to keep getting even closer for as long as the current development team stay true to the product - no sign of let up so far.Unlike some companies Modartt hasn't been sold or sold out out to some stack 'em high sell 'em cheap umbrella corporation. I hope they don't all end up somehow owned by Disney's not so Mickey Mouse operation!!!
These are the reason, why i bought the entire Studio package and I will not hesitate a second to invest in a next paid update. I love making (piano)music - just for my own though - and Pianoteq is the most fascinating opportunity to play all my favourite pianos.
Male den Teufel nicht an die Wand - do not invite trouble - we do not want to have it a Disney corporate product ;-)
Oh they aren't really directly interested in minnows like this. They acquire smaller companies when acquiring corporations who own bigger companies who own them. I don't suppose many people at Disney even know a quarter of what they've really got, or remotely care!
I was considering other bigger companies that have already been swallowed up. Big companies in the plugin game that are minnows in the tech industry.
Being a big fan of Pianoteq , I wonder when version 9 is going to be released and what innovations are going to be included . We can only speculate at this point .
As a reference version 6 was released in 2017
Version 7 in 2020
Version 8 in 2022
Last 2 versions were on 2 years dev cycle. So potentially , v9 could be with us as his year .
Thoughts ?
A "local control off" function should be added. I think a simple button to stop the orignal piano engine is necessary for any VST software/app for the convenience of users.
A "local control off" function should be added. I think a simple button to stop the orignal piano engine is necessary for any VST software/app for the convenience of users.
I don't understand what you are trying to ask for here.
Could you rephrase that.
Pianistically wrote:Being a big fan of Pianoteq , I wonder when version 9 is going to be released and what innovations are going to be included . We can only speculate at this point .
As a reference version 6 was released in 2017
Version 7 in 2020
Version 8 in 2022
Last 2 versions were on 2 years dev cycle. So potentially , v9 could be with us as his year .
Thoughts ?A "local control off" function should be added. I think a simple button to stop the orignal piano engine is necessary for any VST software/app for the convenience of users.
Is this not the same as the ALT and P function or the exclamation mark (!) on the bottom right of screen?
john.w wrote:Pianistically wrote:Being a big fan of Pianoteq , I wonder when version 9 is going to be released and what innovations are going to be included . We can only speculate at this point .
As a reference version 6 was released in 2017
Version 7 in 2020
Version 8 in 2022
Last 2 versions were on 2 years dev cycle. So potentially , v9 could be with us as his year .
Thoughts ?A "local control off" function should be added. I think a simple button to stop the orignal piano engine is necessary for any VST software/app for the convenience of users.
Is this not the same as the ALT and P function or the exclamation mark (!) on the bottom right of screen?
So when he said "stop original piano engine" he actually meant reset all midi and the sound interface?
Possibly.
His wording sounded more like he was asking for a button to turn off a digital piano's own internal sounds hence "original" but that makes little sense within Pianoteq, so you've probably got it - the exclamation mark!
Hardly any new software is being released without the addition of AI assistance. Maybe Modartt will allow users to re-tune the models using Gen AI?
I recently downloaded a demo of Synplant 2, a plugin that uses GenAI to create synthesiser patches from audio recordings. It's actually pretty amazing.
Imagine feeding Pianoteq 5 seconds of Vladimir Horowitz's piano and it creating the patch for you ....
Maybe Pianoteq 10.
Hardly any new software is being released without the addition of AI assistance. Maybe Modartt will allow users to re-tune the models using Gen AI?
I recently downloaded a demo of Synplant 2, a plugin that uses GenAI to create synthesiser patches from audio recordings. It's actually pretty amazing.
Imagine feeding Pianoteq 5 seconds of Vladimir Horowitz's piano and it creating the patch for you ....
Maybe Pianoteq 10.
I really like the idea here . The philosophy behind Synplant of Harmor is somehow similar to what Modartt is doing when they model a given brand , be Steinway or Beichstein or others but instead of producing samples they change hidden parameters in the core generic model with a view for this model to reproduce the original as best as possible . But with enough computing power , be AI , neural network , or maybe quantum computing in the long run, the ideal for the a pianotes end user would be be able to input samples or recording of any acoustic ( or digital) performance and let the software tweak the engine , using above algorithms , in order to reproduce at best as possible , the wanted sound . From my standpoint , as funny as it is to play with parameters, any minute I can save on adjusting parameters is one more minute I can spend playing piano . Have you tried to enter piano samples in synplant or Harbor? I’m very curious to hear the result .
Sampled piano within Harmor sounds dreadful.
More felt options is on my wish list. I think most of the felt presets are to strong and the sounds gets to muddy. Its even worse coming out of speakers than in headphones from my experience. I've created my own half and half versions by morphing a regular sound with a felt version of the same piano but it is still not exactly what Im after.
They could add different felt fabric presets to chose from and even the ability to create your own with options like thickness and density etc. Idk really what parameters would make sense here.
Besides that, the only thing I really want is more refinements in the sound and more upright piano models. U4 is ok, but it doesn't hold a candle to my own morph of Stainway D jazz, U4 and one of the free historic pianos (Erard) with string length lowered to match a small upright. Sounds delicious. try it.
I've created my own half and half versions by morphing a regular sound with a felt version of the same piano but it is still not exactly what Im after.
I love the idea of more felt or otherwise "prepared" piano options.
Out of curiosity, have you played around with mapping the celeste pedal to a continuous pedal (or mod wheel, slider, etc)? It's less CPU-intensive than morphing, I believe, and you get pretty fine control over felt position. You can also map another controller to felt thickness, if desired.
Have I missed something here - any upcoming announcements?
I see 132 users currently looking at the forum, and a few of the times this week I've also seen these big numbers. I've never seen that many simultaneous viewers, typically say in the high twenties and lower when I've looked.
Beta guys know something imminent?
Key Fumbler I noticed this, might be that we are all like minded and waiting for an update. I've just bought a used Apogee Boom interface, never heard Pianoteq sounding this good before, so I'm fairly content with version 7 (more on this Apogee interface in the near future). I'm hoping the harpsichords will have an update, reverbs I'm okay with, the Legacy Reverb is my default reverb now without question.
Nick
My vote is 1.... More realistic Bass would be great!
Are you in favor of a quite more CPU demandaing version variation of pianoteq, to get more sound details/texture, or do you prefer CPU demanding to keep around average CPU personal computer.
1-Yes, I prefer a more CPU intensive.
john.w wrote:Pianistically wrote:Being a big fan of Pianoteq , I wonder when version 9 is going to be released and what innovations are going to be included . We can only speculate at this point .
As a reference version 6 was released in 2017
Version 7 in 2020
Version 8 in 2022
Last 2 versions were on 2 years dev cycle. So potentially , v9 could be with us as his year .
Thoughts ?A "local control off" function should be added. I think a simple button to stop the orignal piano engine is necessary for any VST software/app for the convenience of users.
Is this not the same as the ALT and P function or the exclamation mark (!) on the bottom right of screen?
Sorry for my late response. I forgot to mention this is for iOS users only. The exclamation mark (!) disables all sound output including the sounds from Painoteq itself.
I use a Yamaha CSP piano, which uses an app (Yamaha Pianist) to control almost everything. There is no way to directly disable the orignal sounds via the Yamaha Pianist App. The workaround is to turn the volume to zero in Yamaha Pianist App, close the app, and then start Pianoteq app. It works, but I need to repeat the process everytime I play.
If there is button in Pianoteq to do that, I can just click it in Panoteq (without touching the Yamaha app). Let me know if my description is clear. Thanks.
snurrfint wrote:I've created my own half and half versions by morphing a regular sound with a felt version of the same piano but it is still not exactly what Im after.
I love the idea of more felt or otherwise "prepared" piano options.
Out of curiosity, have you played around with mapping the celeste pedal to a continuous pedal (or mod wheel, slider, etc)? It's less CPU-intensive than morphing, I believe, and you get pretty fine control over felt position. You can also map another controller to felt thickness, if desired.
Yes, I discovered the felt thickness on the celeste pedal just last week. It works very well. Standard is 0.5. Its very nice at around 0.3 - 0.35 imo. Position seems to produce roughly the same result as thinkness so that works too. Might test a really think cloth and have the position altered. Thanks for the help.
Irmin wrote:john.w wrote:A "local control off" function should be added. I think a simple button to stop the orignal piano engine is necessary for any VST software/app for the convenience of users.
Is this not the same as the ALT and P function or the exclamation mark (!) on the bottom right of screen?
Sorry for my late response. I forgot to mention this is for iOS users only. The exclamation mark (!) disables all sound output including the sounds from Painoteq itself.
I use a Yamaha CSP piano, which uses an app (Yamaha Pianist) to control almost everything. There is no way to directly disable the orignal sounds via the Yamaha Pianist App. The workaround is to turn the volume to zero in Yamaha Pianist App, close the app, and then start Pianoteq app. It works, but I need to repeat the process everytime I play.
If there is button in Pianoteq to do that, I can just click it in Panoteq (without touching the Yamaha app). Let me know if my description is clear. Thanks.
Fellow CSP ower here. I dont think pianoteq can control the sound of the instrument as the sound is not sent through the ipad in any way. The Smart pianist app just controls the instrument.
My solution to your problem is just to leave the CSP and pianoteq on all the time. Unless Im actually going away for some days ofc. There is an option in the Smart pianist app to always leave the instrument running. Another added benefit is that my Ipad is always 100% charged, and that the piano is always on for bluetooth steaming of music. I can litteraly just sit down an play whenever, without waiting for 20 seconds before the piano turns on and connects to the app. the power it consumes when idle is very low. I've checked.
You can also turn off the ipad screen (lock it) and it still plays perfectly. Then you can hide the ipad and the chord behind the note rest for a very clean look.
john.w wrote:Irmin wrote:Is this not the same as the ALT and P function or the exclamation mark (!) on the bottom right of screen?
Sorry for my late response. I forgot to mention this is for iOS users only. The exclamation mark (!) disables all sound output including the sounds from Painoteq itself.
I use a Yamaha CSP piano, which uses an app (Yamaha Pianist) to control almost everything. There is no way to directly disable the orignal sounds via the Yamaha Pianist App. The workaround is to turn the volume to zero in Yamaha Pianist App, close the app, and then start Pianoteq app. It works, but I need to repeat the process everytime I play.
If there is button in Pianoteq to do that, I can just click it in Panoteq (without touching the Yamaha app). Let me know if my description is clear. Thanks.
Fellow CSP ower here. I dont think pianoteq can control the sound of the instrument as the sound is not sent through the ipad in any way. The Smart pianist app just controls the instrument.
My solution to your problem is just to leave the CSP and pianoteq on all the time. Unless Im actually going away for some days ofc. There is an option in the Smart pianist app to always leave the instrument running. Another added benefit is that my Ipad is always 100% charged, and that the piano is always on for bluetooth steaming of music. I can litteraly just sit down an play whenever, without waiting for 20 seconds before the piano turns on and connects to the app. the power it consumes when idle is very low. I've checked.
You can also turn off the ipad screen (lock it) and it still plays perfectly. Then you can hide the ipad and the chord behind the note rest for a very clean look.
That's a great idea to keep the CSP piano running all the time. I tried the option in the smart pianist app. If the piano is on, even after I unplug my iPad and plug it back, pianoteq will continue working without any interruption. Thanks for the suggestion!
snurrfint wrote:john.w wrote:Sorry for my late response. I forgot to mention this is for iOS users only. The exclamation mark (!) disables all sound output including the sounds from Painoteq itself.
I use a Yamaha CSP piano, which uses an app (Yamaha Pianist) to control almost everything. There is no way to directly disable the orignal sounds via the Yamaha Pianist App. The workaround is to turn the volume to zero in Yamaha Pianist App, close the app, and then start Pianoteq app. It works, but I need to repeat the process everytime I play.
If there is button in Pianoteq to do that, I can just click it in Panoteq (without touching the Yamaha app). Let me know if my description is clear. Thanks.
Fellow CSP ower here. I dont think pianoteq can control the sound of the instrument as the sound is not sent through the ipad in any way. The Smart pianist app just controls the instrument.
My solution to your problem is just to leave the CSP and pianoteq on all the time. Unless Im actually going away for some days ofc. There is an option in the Smart pianist app to always leave the instrument running. Another added benefit is that my Ipad is always 100% charged, and that the piano is always on for bluetooth steaming of music. I can litteraly just sit down an play whenever, without waiting for 20 seconds before the piano turns on and connects to the app. the power it consumes when idle is very low. I've checked.
You can also turn off the ipad screen (lock it) and it still plays perfectly. Then you can hide the ipad and the chord behind the note rest for a very clean look.
That's a great idea to keep the CSP piano running all the time. I tried the option in the smart pianist app. If the piano is on, even after I unplug my iPad and plug it back, pianoteq will continue working without any interruption. Thanks for the suggestion!
Yes it will. Thats another benefit. I regularly use my iPad to draw/paint so its pretty convenient. Its funny how the connection to pianoteq is instant while the connection to their own app specifically designed for the instrument takes like 20 seconds. They should really allow smart pianist to run as a background service just like pianoteq. Glad I could help.
automatically create a piano based on reference sounds. Give it a few notes or a played piece and get it to figure out. or perhaps combine a number of pianos and morph them to get as close as possible to a reference sound. so you will still need to own licences of the combined pianos (as to not jeopardise sales)
this could be trained on a neural network.
and some organs would be nice.
I think Pianoteq is already a great product and particularly like the new Bosendorfer piano. However, for v9 I would like the following :-
-1: The most important for me is to further improve in sound and realism of all the pianos. Whilst I feel Pianoteq has come a long way, there are still a few areas where the sound is a little plasticky or metallic. Also improve hammer noise and the attack of the notes.
-2: Improve the built in reverb to sound less metallic
-3: Improve the dynamics and modulation processors
-4: Change the "mic placement" screen to have the same or similar GUI as the main piano page. Also have much clearer controls over all the different mic levels and improve the images of all the different mics.
-5: Have additional controls over the individual mechanical noises when the felt pedal is depressed
-6: Have additional controls over the individual mechanical noises of the damper pedal
-7: Improve the overall GUI will more photo realistic images of the pianos and halls/rooms along with an even clearer layout and workflow.
automatically create a piano based on reference sounds. Give it a few notes or a played piece and get it to figure out. or perhaps combine a number of pianos and morph them to get as close as possible to a reference sound. so you will still need to own licences of the combined pianos (as to not jeopardise sales)
this could be trained on a neural network.
and some organs would be nice.
and to convincingly beat the sound of especially the VSL Synchron collection.
Version 8 is so good (has reached such a high level of achieving an ideal, in my opinion) that I don't really care.
I so agree! Personally still on 7, which is also so extremely good already.
If there is one thing that would make me upgrade immediately, though, it would be to get some background strings in the standalone version. Even the most basic strings would be better than none.
I commented to Modartt team that they did a nice jump, from version 7 to version 8.
Then I said: "Do it again."
Their answer was:
https://youtu.be/ulupmfD-fFk?si=0dNjorWRjOOpPUU3
I commented to Modartt team that they did a nice jump, from version 7 to version 8.
Then I said: "Do it again."Their answer was:
The power of physical modelling compels you!!!
Reaction after endure a 5--6 layer velocity sampler:
https://i.makeagif.com/media/7-14-2015/NztrG1.gif
The power of physical modelling compels you!!!
I'd be keen on an artist model like a Yuja Wang Steinway. Or a label model like Deutsche Grammophon. I think the artist/producer/engineer input at that level would be just as valuable for modeling as the manufacturers.
I think Pianoteq is already a great product and particularly like the new Bosendorfer piano. However, for v9 I would like the following :-
-1: The most important for me is to further improve in sound and realism of all the pianos. Whilst I feel Pianoteq has come a long way, there are still a few areas where the sound is a little plasticky or metallic. Also improve hammer noise and the attack of the notes.
-2: Improve the built in reverb to sound less metallic
-3: Improve the dynamics and modulation processors
-4: Change the "mic placement" screen to have the same or similar GUI as the main piano page. Also have much clearer controls over all the different mic levels and improve the images of all the different mics.
-5: Have additional controls over the individual mechanical noises when the felt pedal is depressed
-6: Have additional controls over the individual mechanical noises of the damper pedal
-7: Improve the overall GUI will more photo realistic images of the pianos and halls/rooms along with an even clearer layout and workflow.
+1 for improved dynamics processing. I'm not using the FX and instead am tweaking Velocity curve and Dynamics slider. If true compression is needed I'll use Fabfilter C2 and accept a bit of latency.
I would also like to hear more low bass, which I understand is more processor intensive.
These are both minor issues for me. Overall Pianoteq 8 provides very good sound quality with excellent playability imho. Current instruments: Steinway, Petrof, Bechstein, Bosendorfer and Electric Pianos. I still have CFX and Ivory sampled pianos but have not installed them on the new system yet.
Great list. I'd like to add that since we can do layering, why not model a synth pad so we can layer that wiothte pianos and EPs. This would be amazing!
I think Pianoteq is already a great product and particularly like the new Bosendorfer piano. However, for v9 I would like the following :-
-1: The most important for me is to further improve in sound and realism of all the pianos. Whilst I feel Pianoteq has come a long way, there are still a few areas where the sound is a little plasticky or metallic. Also improve hammer noise and the attack of the notes.
-2: Improve the built in reverb to sound less metallic
-3: Improve the dynamics and modulation processors
-4: Change the "mic placement" screen to have the same or similar GUI as the main piano page. Also have much clearer controls over all the different mic levels and improve the images of all the different mics.
-5: Have additional controls over the individual mechanical noises when the felt pedal is depressed
-6: Have additional controls over the individual mechanical noises of the damper pedal
-7: Improve the overall GUI will more photo realistic images of the pianos and halls/rooms along with an even clearer layout and workflow.
Nice to read how incredibly many ideas you all have regarding the development of Pianoteq. Thanks, it will help us all.
Because:
Modartt have found their place in the sun, they are in a situation where they will be happy and have everything that they want, their knowledge, amazing workers and us.
Have been on board since 2013 and I am amazed how they achieve to produce so many different sounds and products with Pianoteq.
I'm absolutely sure that all the ideas in this forum and music with Ptq/Orgtq on internet, encourages Modartt to continue developing their software.
I don't think Ptq 9 is coming yet. Possibly they invest in a new piano model. Someone mentioned Fazioli. It has been mentioned every now and then before.
It might be companies that it are difficult to get an agreement with, have been said by others here before, might be Fazioli and other are like that. Don’t know.
Since the development is going faster and faster it would be strange if Ptq/Orgtq doesn't also develop continuously - it never ends…
Well, this is how I think about it
All the best, everyone and thank you Modartt
Stig
The Bosendorfer is so beautiful, versatile and enjoyable to play, that the only thing I can think to suggest is that whatever advancements in the model were implemented to produce the sound and character of the Bosendorfer, also be incorporated into the other piano models.
Thank you, Modartt team, for producing such a fine piano model.
I've come to realize that the only thing I really want is an even more realistic piano model. Thats the most important thing after all. If they could bake in some more character (whatever that means) I would be very happy. My only complaint is that the main piano sound is kind of dry a lot of the time. Its compensated by the best resonance model there is and insane playability so Im not really complaining.
Second on my list would be to add more upright models. There are one upright and like 15 flagship grand pianos.
Then improvements to the reverb and other effects would be the 3rd I think.
Oh, and a global volume knob. I get some sound artifacts when using full volume and turning down the volume of every preset is annoying.
A "local control off" function should be added. I think a simple button to stop the orignal piano engine is necessary for any VST software/app for the convenience of users.
Oh this would be amazing. One of the main reasons I haven’t pulled the trigger is that it’s so annoying to toggle the local control… would be awesome if the app just did it automatically on launch / quit.
Seems easy to control w midi!
Please vote:
Are you in favor of a quite more CPU demandaing version variation of pianoteq, to get more sound details/texture, or do you prefer CPU demanding to keep around average CPU personal computer.
1-Yes, I prefer a more CPU intensive.
2-No, I want CPU demands to stay around average personal computer.
For the sake of being a more portable solution, I would argue for #2. Not very many other solutions can be loaded onto a modest laptop.
