Unfortunately, the improvements in Pianoteq have slowed to a crawl, and the next version will be the first to actually have regressed from the pinnacle which was the previous version. But get that one while you can, because the following version will be much worse!
😁
QuasiUnaFantasia Unfortunately, the improvements in Pianoteq have slowed to a crawl, and the next version will be the first to actually have regressed from the pinnacle which was the previous version. But get that one while you can, because the following version will be much worse!
Where did you get this information from? surely, it is not the case (and I know that from “the most reliable source”).
Pete14 It is a forecast made by a statistical model based on the historical developments of Pianoteq.
Well, I’m sorry to break it to you, but that “forecast” you talk about was made by a static sample, and not a statistical model, and if there’s one thing I know about static-data that would be that it is, well, static (lacking in movement, action, or change)….
Pete14 I'm willing to update the model upon arrival of fresh data (i.e. version 9). And - to be earnest (for just a moment anyway) - I would love to see actual major improvement in Pianoteq. It's just that my expectations are now so low that I find it difficult to believe in any improvements to the tone; they will probably add some features, but the tone will stay essentially the same.
Pete14 Yeah, dream on, Pete! I wonder what kind of a "reliable source" is this that you got this stuff from? Surely, it's your own imagination, because you are an imagineer! Therefore, that's what they are, whild imaginings that can only be fantasy.
Based on historic developments of PianoTeq, however, we know that it has been rehashing old stuff over the past 6 versions at the most, and its improvements are small, if not at all. More piano models, yes, but the sound is still uninspiring.
As a pianist, that's why I'm still staying away from PianoTeq.
QuasiUnaFantasia they will probably add some features, but the tone will stay essentially the same.
Yes, and not a piano tone, unfortunately. Heck, even the Roland and Kawai models on their on-board sounds are better tone wise than PianoTeq.
I have a feeling (not merely a "gut" one, but based on various technical insights) that the real problem for Pianoteq is that Modartt are adamant in keeping the CPU requirements very low, and for this reason they have to avoid including a lot of high frequency material, and this entails distortion relative to the "correct" tone. Some people apparently don't perceive any unpleasantness to the tone, and so they happily use Pianoteq; maybe this user base is simply enough for Modartt.
IIRC, YAM and KAWA Digital Pianos are all samples, AWM or PCM tech based. Roland is in the league of PTQ, modelling. And IIRC, Sir Pete is using YAM digital pianos. Yam digital piano and sampled vis are all samples. Why sampled vis are to the blame? Was there any unhappy purchase experience of those samples?
Another thing. Pete mentioned version 9 is coming. Let's think about the release cycle of PianoTeq, if there is one.
If a Google search got the info right, PianoTeq 6 was released September 6, 2017, version 7 in December 11, 2020, and most recent version 8 in November 16, 2022.
So, why don't we just wait? We still have a couple of months till 2024 is out, will version 9 come this year? It's about time they release it. And then we can judge if Pete is dreaming or there's truth in his posts. I'm willing to be on the side lines watching it all happen.
However, from 6 to 8, the tone hasn't improved much, which is still quite sad.
QuasiUnaFantasia Good point. Also, the CPU power on phones and other smart devices doesn't allow very much live processing, so you can have PianoTeq on these platforms, too.
David Lai However, from 6 to 8, the tone hasn't improved much, which is still quite sad.
I upgraded from version 6 to version 7, but I did not feel the sound improved at all. New features were introduced, but by then I had discovered samples ...
Pianoteq Activate! 😁
Pete14 Dear Pete, We're not joking around or dreaming here. Face the facts, man!
no, the whole thing is because he's a child, unhappy, always whining about how the things truly are.
he just wants to be different then the majority
if we were in the modeling team, he would be talking about how samples are the future, how great and high quality they are compared to modeled pianos.
QuasiUnaFantasia the real problem for Pianoteq is that Modartt are adamant in keeping the CPU requirements very low, and for this reason they have to avoid including a lot of high frequency material, and this entails distortion relative to the "correct" tone.
Okay, I’ll give an inch here….
In the past this seemed to play right into the hands of people still using their grandma’s computer, and not willing to upgrade to a Mac Pro, but today we have a totally new reality, and what would’ve cost thousands then, can now be had for hundreds (the M2 Mac Mini, for example), and now that the M4 Mac Mini is about to be released, the M2 will go down in price; never mind the M1 Mini; which is still a powerhouse despite.
Pete14 Maybe that will indeed prompt a change in Modartts' approach.
Yes!
And further elaborating on your point, I remember Modartt at one point talking about the mammoth amount of calculations per seconds required to render a ‘realistic’ lower-end, and yes, I think an M2 Mac Mini would be able to handle this and then some……
Pete14 That feature request has come up a few times for discussion on the Modartt forums. I've seen it most recently here: https://forum.modartt.com//viewtopic.php?id=11505&p=2
Maybe if enough people press it, it'll get some attention from Modartt? It'd be nice if they had a community wishlist where you could vote on feature requests and discuss them in a little more of an organized manner.
Maybe it's just not feasible without a total overhaul, too. Hard to say.
