CyberGene Good point. There are some rather Provoking PTQ Posters out here that, in all honesty, I don't understand their logic, if it could be called thus. But at the end of the day, I'm glad I think differently than them, and I'm glad my appreciation for what's real and authentic is still there. That's something they can never take from me!
HZPiano About Modern D, you mention not having listened to it yet for lack of time. Should you find time and some gusto, I suggest you do before somewhat dismissing it as "cannot be good either".
So I took the time to do that and I concluded that it's not for me. At the risk of being thrown rotten tomatoes, eggs and blunt objects, I'd say that there are some circumstances in which some aspects of its sound in the bass are similar to Pianoteq version 6 (note that I wrote some and I know, nuance is impossible these days you are either bright as the Sun from 10 miles above its surface or dark as dark matter in the intergalactic space).
To be clear, I don't say that as an offense. I did not like Pianoteq at that version (I bought it later when they improved that characteristic), but when I pointed it out to some people, some of them did not consider it such a big deal, as I am sure some of you don't consider this such a big deal in Modern D.
And to continue to be clear, there are some things in Modern D tone that make it much more realistic than Pianoteq, just that those do not justify the cost (including the OS change) for me, especially considering the lack of demo license and of money back guarantee. Remaining in the same company, Ravencroft 275 would be a better choice for me, considering the demos I've heard. I might think about purchasing that one, in the iOS version (which is more limited but also much more cheap).
CyberGene I am certainly one to take blame for engaging in the heated discussions but I never start bashing Pianoteq without first being provoked.
Since this is my thread, I'll repeat: what I find annoying is not you expressing that opinion. If you say
To me Pianoteq sounds like crap falling into the water when I sit on porcelain throne
that is totally fine: I don't care what you like or don't. I may even engage in the discussion and ask "how is that different than rocks thrown into a pond?" or the like.
What I find completely annoying is a few people insisting that since X sounds like crap to them then it must sound like crap to everyone, and if anyone disagree then they must be an idiot (or have a "bad ear" or similar). I've seen a lot of these statements, for both X=Pianoteq or X=ModernD, explicit or implicit and that annoys me a lot. Like what you like, dislike what you dislike, and feel free to explain why and argue with others who disagree. But be respectful of these others who disagree, because they are not idiots, they are human beings in their musical journey like you.
I think @Mindbullets and @johanibraaten put it right.
BTW, I have no issues with heated discussions š I may have a quick temper but I am also quick to apologize and calm down. I have no issues with Pete and can keep arguing with him about PT all day long for fun š
But some people are frustrated with forum atmosphere that is not all peace and friendly chatter. Canāt make everyone happy š
You know my opinion. Iām an ultra libertarian and prefer to have as minimal moderation as possible. However, sometimes moderation is needed when I notice that the forum is suffocated and in decline. Thatās what happened with SP. I see no negative trends to the forum participation in correlation with the PT quarrels, even on the contrary.
I think it should be pointed out that Pete14 for all his advocacy of Pianoteq and modeled (US-spelling in Pete's honour, though this does not extend to using the word "honor") piano sounds, he does not seem to like either so much that he would actually use them himself ...
There's trolldom behind most of his postings (that was probably funnier in Danish than in contemporary English š).
RIP Like what you like, dislike what you dislike, and feel free to explain why and argue with others who disagree. But be respectful of these others who disagree, because they are not idiots, they are human beings in their musical journey like you.
This.
Like some (many?) of you here, I was pretty excited to hear about a new VST being released, and even more so when I read the reviews from people like @David Lai or @OlivierW.
RIP What I find completely annoying is a few people insisting that since X sounds like crap to them then it must sound like crap to everyone
I was also surprised to see some discussions get pretty heated, especially given the results we observe in experiments like Laurel vs. Yanny.
I think this proves that people hear things differently.
If this is true, then:
You may think that VST A sounds like crap and that VST B is the very best out there, but no matter how strongly you feel about it, some people will still disagree with you. God forbid, some may even think that VST A is vastly superior to VST Bā¦ And the worst part of it is: they're not any more right/wrong than you areā¦
RIP So I took the time to do that and I concluded that it's not for me.
Same here š.
Cheers and, 10 miles from the sun is a little toasty to me. I'll retreat into intergalactic deep space, then. Maybe a nice dodecahedron will get me there š. I'll revisit PI to see if there's a nice little blueprint to be found in there somewhere.
HZ
Keyscape is an example of sampled product that receives extremely biased reviews. I saw people said how horrible it was on gearspace, but in other forums, it was held as top notch production-ready piano sound. So PTQ is not alone. Even VSL gets good and bad reviews, but VSL fans are not so emotional to fight every dissidents. Yeah, I guess so, no right or wrong, tastes differ. What is the most delicious food or beer? What is the best color? What is the best piano vi? Well, could be anything for any fans.
I participate on the KC forum and itās a forum about gigging keyboard musicians playing mostly pop and rock covers. They sometimes discuss pianos and Iāve been shocked with some peopleās lack of understanding for even basic piano features š Yet, they can be opinionated and harsh on a piano I love. I canāt take seriously someone who e.g. wants to control half-pedaling with an expression pedal š¤¦š»āāļø
You can find all sorts of folks being fans of all types of pianos. There are some top-notch classical musicians who love Pianoteq, and there are those who donāt.
Thatās why I donāt care about other people, regardless of who they are. I believe I know what I want in a digital/software piano and I listen to and trust only my own ears, hands and instincts.
With all that in mind, Iāve never found Pianoteq to be acceptable in sound. What is more, itās not playable since out of the box the touch curve/response is all over the place and using the automatic curve feature has never worked for me, it makes it even worse. And thereās inconsistent response across various regions which requires per key adjustment and thatās ridiculous. How come Garritan CFX is spot on out of the box? So, no, PT is not my thing. But thatās me. YMMV.
amc252 I ask this out of genuine cusiosity. If Pianoteq is so bad, why do most of the top brands endorse it and let them use names and models, whereas the other VI creators have to make up suggestive names for their instruments?
The people responsible for that end of things probably don't know or care very much about all of the virtual pianos on the market.
Steinway have no control over sampled libraries. Anyone can make one and say it was made using a Steinway. It never even occurred to me that some libraries don't have the official Steinway logo. It doesn't really matter too much. Without Steinway's name, there's no meaningful connection between them and a modelled piano.
Johnstaf The people responsible for that end of things probably don't know or care very much about all of the virtual pianos on the market.
Steinway have no control over sampled libraries. Anyone can make one and say it was made using a Steinway. It never even occurred to me that some libraries don't have the official Steinway logo. It doesn't really matter too much. Without Steinway's name, there's no meaningful connection between them and a modelled piano.
It seems to me rather unlikely that Steinway, one of the most established brands in their market worldwide, does not care about other entities using their logo and name. And, in the case of Pianoteq, is not just Steinway, but C. Bechstein, Bosendorfer, etc. Also, while other VIs refer to Steinway (or other top brands) in their description, I don't recall any VI that has Steinway (or another brand name) in the name of their products. I might be mistaken, of course. I don't buy paid VSTs since most of them aren't Linux native (I haven't bought Pianoteq either, for that matter).
As I said, I have no idea also how big and wealthy Modartt is. Can they afford to buy off all those famous brands and put their logos on their product?
How much could it be worthwhile for Steinway, C. Bechstein, Bosendorfer, Bluthner & company to have their names attached to a crappy product?
My perception is that Pianoteq is not aimed to professional or recording artists. Perhaps someone could use it on stage where quality is less critical (I just watched a jazz festival where the pianist played a 30 year old Clavinova and it sounded just fine within the ensamble).
Maybe, as a marketing synergy, for big piano brands Pianoteq can be a viable vehicle for promotion, although I can't imagine Pianoteq users to upgrade to a Steingraeber grand en masse.
Or, perhaps, to the ears of those brands executives, Pianoteq rendition of their instruments is okay.
amc252 It seems to me rather unlikely that Steinway, one of the most established brands in their market worldwide, does not care about other entities using their logo and name.
There's nothing they can do about someone sampling a Steinway and stating that they have done so. It's not the same as using their branding. Garritan Steinway was marketed as the "official" Steinway if I remember correctly.
amc252 How much could it be worthwhile for Steinway, C. Bechstein, Bosendorfer, Bluthner & company to have their names attached to a crappy product?
Not everyone thinks it's a crappy product.
amc252 Maybe, as a marketing synergy, for big piano brands Pianoteq can be a viable vehicle for promotion, although I can't imagine Pianoteq users to upgrade to a Steingraeber grand en masse.
I'd imagine some of these brands have a higher profile now than they've had at any time in the last century. Steingraeber, for example, was almost forgotten about in the piano world. In many parts of the world, Bechstein was really only remembered for their pre-WWI pianos.
Johnstaf There's nothing they can do about someone sampling a Steinway and stating that they have done so. It's not the same as using their branding. Garritan Steinway was marketed as the "official" Steinway if I remember correctly.
I was referring to Pianoteq using the Steinway (and others) name and logo, which is very different than saying 'we sampled a Steinway D'. If Steinway did not endorse Modartt product, they would not be allowed to use the name and logo.
Even DPs manufacturers, such as Korg, Roland, Casio, do not use the word 'Steinway' when they refer to their onboard sound.
Of course. That was a hyperbole. I personally don't think that either. Matter of fact, as a coder, I find Pianoteq concept interesting.
We donāt know what has happened between Modartt and Steinway. Is Pianoteq linked from the Steinway website as the official software Steinway? Do you think Steinway pays to Modartt?
CyberGene Do you think Steinway pays to Modartt?
I would assume the other way around. Use Steinway and other brands names and logos on their product is a big part of Pianoteq marketing strategy (and appeal).
I'm interested in the exact process and wondering if there's any information somewhere. For instance, if any other software company has attempted to use the Steinway name but has been refused. What the process of approval is, whether they select among many contestants and choose the best.
I don't think Pianoteq is crap, it used to be in earlier versions. Nowadays it's just a very subpar sounding software piano. However, it's a piano software, no doubt about it. It's not modeled the way many people imagine it is, but it's still the most advanced software there is in terms of support for resonances, pedaling, etc. It's such a shame it doesn't sound good (IMO).
This is purely my speculation but I think the issue is Modartt have no experience with piano recording, they are not sound engineers. Philippe is a mathematician (and piano technician AFAIK?), so they know the intricacies of the piano working. But ultimately Pianoteq needs to produce the equivalent of a recorded sound in the computer and that's where they fail (IMO). Contrary to recording engineers. They know how to record a piano properly and is what they do but they are not good at ensuring all the intricacies of half-pedaling and resonances are provided, so we end up with sound that is so much better than Pianoteq (IMO) as a recorded wave file but lacks refined behavior.
I think some of the sampled libraries are making progress towards ensuring better behavior. Pianoteq is also making progress in making sound that is better. But (IMO) Modartt are just too slow and PT is lagging considerably behind (IMO).
IMO, Steinway are too concerned with themselves to care about software pianos and only get paid by Modartt without giving it too much thought for the above context. Someone at Steinway just played it for a while, decided it was OK and gave them the permissions. After all, Pianoteq sounds like a piano š I've said jokingly that it doesn't but if I do a blind test, I will always say it's a piano sound. Although, I will always recognize it's Pianoteq too š
P.S. I've been very careful to use IMO in any possible occasion where people might decide I expressed facts and not personal opinion. Hopefully this time there won't be the anonymous PT fans who would angrily go and thrash my YouTube videos because I wrote yet another post criticizing Pianoteq. As a side note, I can't understand why we should still use IMO when posting on a forum. It's obvious that what we write is a personal opinion, unless stated otherwise.
Surely, your IMOs are fine, but if you really want to show your humility, Iād suggest IM(H)O, for this clearly indicates that your opinion is indeed a humble oneā¦ā¦This is just a humble suggestion.
Now, based on what you wrote above, āengineers better at recording, mathematicians better at getting the behavior right,ā Iād say youād be just fine with engineers & mathematicians working together on a āhybridā approach?
Of course, we do have sampled pianos with modeled resonances, but ultimately these are mostly a bunch of recordings with modeled resonances sprinkled on top, but Iām talking about a 50/50, truly hybrid approach; something I believe Roland used to do (modeled decays, etcā¦) but obviously didnāt do it well.
Then thereās āTruePianos,ā but I donāt know what happened to them (no updates for a very long time).
IMHO!
I don't think it matters to Steinway at all whether a given VI sounds like a Steinway, or not. From their perspective it is probably all about advertising. The more times the name Steinway appears somewhere, the better.
Someone once said: there's no such thing as bad advertising.
Those who make the decisions at Steinway care about money first, last, and everywhere in between. From their perspective having the Steinway name and logo on a VI is probably indifferent from having it on a ballpoint pen.
You will say anything to take this away from us, wonāt you? but logic dictates that Steinway would be better off in terms of āadvertisingā and making money if they went with one of the behemoths (VSL, VI-Labs, Garritan, etc..) because these brands are more recognizable āround the world; whereas, Pianoteq is more controversial (doing it their way), and more of a niche product (or at least it is perceived that way).
Why canāt we accept that Steinway likes what Modartt is doing? Why is that so hard? If anything, we should be hopeful that this āofficialā collaboration could lead to bigger things (literally)!
IMHO!
Pete14 Why canāt we accept that Steinway likes what Modartt is doing?
I don't think Steinway knows what Modartt are doing, apart from spreading the name Steinway across the internet.