CyberGene How do we know that Modartt are not milking you with one and same model being EQ-ed and a bunch of hidden knobs being turned?
Actually we do know that they do exactly that. They have said that to create a model (say the new Bosendorfer) they just turn a bunch of knobs (which are not available to users, not even in the Pro version) and here the model comes. They even tried (not too strongly) to encourage a marketplace of "knob turning" in which people could turn the (user available) knobs to change Steinway into Baldwin (just to mention an instrument they don't sell). In fact this knob turning seems a really hard problem for the average customer, and they typically make it sound worse. I personally don't see any problem with that.
CyberGene Are you still not getting it why Pianoteq is in a desperate need of brand endorsement?
Not sure if it's "desperate" but it certainly helps their marketing, and hence why most people (including in this thread) think that Modartt pays the acoustic brands to use their names and logos. AFAIK the terms of the agreements (who pays who, if at all, let alone the amount) has never been disclosed.
Pete14 This would be like Coke allowing their name to be used next to Fentanyl; because, you know, why would Coke care about knowing who is using their likeness, or what it is that they “are doing”…..the nerve you people have!
Obviously Pete is exaggerating in his usual way, but he has a point. Modartt has been able to secure the names and logos of pretty much all the major acoustic piano manufacturers still in business today, with the exception of Kawai (I'm counting Yamaha in with Bosendorfer which they control, and I'm not counting Mason and Hamlin since it's a pretty small volume manufacturer -- if you want add those two and say "all manufacturers but 3").
If you want to dismiss that, fine, but it's a pretty huge accomplishment, in my opinion. At least one of this must be true:
- Modartt is really a cunning company with deep pockets
- All acoustic piano manufacturers are really desperate for money and advertisement and (to piggyback on Pete's hyperbole) would put their name next to anything to get the money
- All acoustic piano manufacturers are idiots (or have poor earing)
- Pianoteq actually sound "good enough" for most people
Did I forget any other possibility? Here are my opinions on these options
- I think the first has close to 0% chances of being true
- I think the second is definitely true for some manufacturers, but it can't be true for them all. For example, Steinway refuses to sell their stencils to registered piano technicians as described in various places so it would be very strange that they forbade the use of their trademark to those that repair their product following their guidelines, but allow such use to Pianoteq, without checking it and deeming it at least okay. Also, for any manufacturer, endorsing a sampler would be much better marketing than endorsing a model, since they could tell: we are the best, and the second best is a recording of the actual thing! So why no endorsements there?
- Ditto for the third: one idiot, maybe two or even three fine. But all of them?
- My opinion is that this must be the most likely option
If my opinion is correct (which might or might not), I'm even willing to say that the ones who hate/dislike it could have an above average or even excellent hearing in some ways which I tried (and failed) to characterize. And of course there would be "borderline" people, like myself, who could hear some flaws in the Pianoteq instruments, but not so much to make it unbearable (I'm speaking of the last version, the previous ones were indeed not good enough for me).
