pianow i don't wanna sacrifice the sound and realism to get an extra 10 percent playability.
So you’ve actually gone and quantified Pianoteq’s playability?
How did you arrive at “an extra 10 percent playability;” what kind of metrics are we talkin’ here?
Pete14 Relativism, Pete. Modeled pianos are less resource intensive, the typical sizes are smaller, as you know very well (since you use modeled piano VSTs only). So he wasn't saying exactly more than 10% of playability.
That said, I agree with pianow. I wouldn't sacrifice realism of sound for that extra playability and resource saving.
For me if a sampled vi has meh tone, then it loses totally. If a sampled vi has sweet tone but unbalanced in some aspects or with extremelly huge disk footprint, it won't be opened a lot and gradually phazes out.
For a modelled vi with meh tone, I could pretend it is still learning and could be better later, and I will take advantage of its playability instead of blaming the tone.
pipAT For a modelled vi with meh tone, I could pretend it is still learning and could be better later, and I will take advantage of its playability instead of blaming the tone.
What a gracious / big heart you have! I wouldn't go for the meh tone, LOL.
There are more sampled vi products than modelled ones. Sampled products offer wide choices of tone. That's what I like. Modelled products are based on limited training materials. Often general and pure tone that sometimes sounds wierd in real life. I guess it is still too early to say modelled products cannot do better. 18 years ago, PTQ sounded like toy or GM midi. But it is getting better in painstaking speed. I just like to see more choices and oppotunities to play the piano.
David Lai So he wasn't saying exactly more than 10% of playability.
But that’s the problem, he did actually say ‘10% more playability,’ and this can be misleading for anyone in the market for a VST; which is why he should simply say that his impression is that Pianoteq is more playable ‘in general,’ but the minute he gives a figure, “10%,” I have to step in for the sake of transparency!
Imagine if all of a sudden you find out that “2% reduced fat milk” is just some guy’s random assumption, but no measurements were properly & scientifically taken and verified by a third party; that could mean that you’ve been drinking milk that is 1% or 1/2% reduced all along, yet you thought it was 2%, so no, this is not acceptable!
He needs to clarify, redact, and/or show me the data confirming ‘10% more playability.’
I don’t make the rules; I simply enforce them!
Before I bought an FP30X, I was worried that I might be disappointed by the tone. It turned out I didn't care much when I was practicing. I guess I am more picky about the tone of sampled products because the tone is what I am eagerly expected to enjoy. I know what modelled products sound like. So, I can lower my expectation for that. For sampled products, as long as its playability is on par with hardware or digital pianos. I can lower my expectation for the playability for production purpose not for piano performance.
Now I see these different tastes:
Acoustic preferred.
Sampled preferred.
Modelled preferred.
Hardware preferred
Hybrid or Smapled preferred.
Pete14 I don’t make the rules; I simply enforce them!
What an imagineer. Don't you even know how literature works? Something that average people can understand what he's doing, and you come and question him? I'm shocked.
Pete14 what kind of metrics are we talkin’ here?
it's called "experience"
i played several sampled pianos, some modeled ones and of course some acoustic ones
and based on my experience the gap between most top notch sampled pianos and the pianoteq (in terms of playability) isn't that big (vsl, garittan, vilabs and some others)
maybe it's even less then 10 percent but it's noticeable and that's why i talked about it in the first place.
pianow Haha, I was trying to describe it as relative comparisons. For example, when we say something is 10 times better than something else, it's not literally "10 times" as in being measured. If Pete can't even understand this linguistic device, then I'm sad for him.
pipAT I could pretend it is still learning and could be better later
oh yea, if that was the case with the modeling, we would've had acoustic pianos in our machines by now
but it's been years since the pianoteq 5 released, now we have version 8 and soon enough the v9 will come out eventually, do you think the improvements are acceptable? i don't think so
pipAT I will take advantage of its playability instead of blaming the tone
let me tell you something then, it's not like all of us are using vst instruments as hobby or a only for playing, me personally i use them for production so i can't take any kind of advantage of its playability cause it sound terrible
but what if i use something that sounds 90 percent better but plays a little bit worse? just a little... still very playable
David Lai it's not literally "10 times" as in being measured
he just wants to argue, not that he's very good at it, not at all.
pianow it's called "experience"
i played several sampled pianos, some modeled ones and of course some acoustic onesand based on my experience the gap between most top notch sampled pianos and the pianoteq (in terms of playability) isn't that big (vsl, garittan, vilabs and some others)
Why didn’t you just say that then?
Pete14 But that’s the problem, he did actually say ‘10% more playability,’ and this can be misleading for anyone in the market for a VST; which is why he should simply say that his impression is that Pianoteq is more playable ‘in general,’ but the minute he gives a figure, “10%,” I have to step in for the sake of transparency!
Imagine if all of a sudden you find out that “2% reduced fat milk” is just some guy’s random assumption, but no measurements were properly & scientifically taken and verified by a third party; that could mean that you’ve been drinking milk that is 1% or 1/2% reduced all along, yet you thought it was 2%, so no, this is not acceptable!
He needs to clarify, redact, and/or show me the data confirming ‘10% more playability.’
I don’t make the rules; I simply enforce them!
funny you mentioned transparency
if you wanna fight over "someone not being so transparent" the enemy number 1 would be modartt themselves
imagine if they were so transparent then everyone would've known that today's modeling is nothing but learning from samples data
but what their costumers actually think is that the pianoteq is like having a acoustic piano inside your computer with all the mechanical parts moving up and down (i'm not talking about the pros of course)
Frankly I am fine with modelled products playing for practice or for fun. I bought a modelled sound , FP30X. Modelled products are improving in a painstakingly slow speed. The bass and treble are better in PTQ8 than PTQ5. But honesly not on par with sampled products.
I am not defending for Pete or PTQ only. I hope discussion won't go from one extreme to the other side of extreme. Like some pointed out the PTQ enthusiasts are fiercely defending for PTQ and do not allow anyone criticize it. Hopefully, sampled vi preferered fans will not crucify praise of a little improvement of still minority status, modelled products.
Pete14
perhaps because it's none of you business how people talk, and a comment is simply a comment (opinion)
we don't have to repeat (("oh this is just my opinion")) everytime we say something.
David Lai Haha, I was trying to describe it as relative comparisons. For example, when we say something is 10 times better than something else, it's not literally "10 times" as in being measured. If Pete can't even understand this linguistic device, then I'm sad for him.
I’m sorry, but this “linguistic device” you talk about is at best vague!
If you say X is ten times better than Y, then you better have some data to support that; because we don’t deal with ambiguity ‘round here, and it could be that X is only 5, or 20, or even 100 (you name it) times better!
You do know that with your kind of ‘linguistic logic’ we will crash upon landing on Mars? So no, “Houston” can’t simply say to the astronauts “you’re about ten feet from landing on Mars,” they have to be exact, to the letter, and precise!
Pete14 You do know that with your kind of ‘linguistic logic’ we will crash upon landing on Mars? So no, “Houston” can’t simply say to the astronauts “you’re about ten feet from landing on Mars,” they have to be exact, to the letter, and precise!
Go and talk about science on a different context, Pete. This is virtual pianos we're discussing here. What a strange person you are, Pete! I'm really shocked!!!
David Lai Go and talk about science on a different context, Pete. This is virtual pianos we're discussing here. What a strange person you are, Pete! I'm really shocked!!!
But David, if it were not for “science” we wouldn’t have modeling, and that would be a great disservice to humanity!
Pete14 Alright, I'm not going to argue with you, because you are weird.