Modern D vs Pianoteq vs The People

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.

Johnstaf 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.

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 don’t 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 🙂 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 🙂

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, I’d suggest IM(H)O, for this clearly indicates that your opinion is indeed a humble one……This is just a humble suggestion.

Now, based on what you wrote above, ‘engineers better at recording, mathematicians better at getting the behavior right,’ I’d say you’d be just fine with engineers & mathematicians working together on a “hybrid” 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 I’m talking about a 50/50, truly hybrid approach; something I believe Roland used to do (modeled decays, etc…) but obviously didn’t do it well.

Then there’s “TruePianos,” but I don’t 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.

QuasiUnaFantasia

You will say anything to take this away from us, won’t you? but logic dictates that Steinway would be better off in terms of “advertising” and making money if they went with one of the behemoths (VSL, VI-Labs, Garritan, etc..) because these brands are more recognizable ‘round 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 can’t we accept that Steinway likes what Modartt is doing? Why is that so hard? If anything, we should be hopeful that this “official” collaboration could lead to bigger things (literally)!

IMHO!

Pete14 Why can’t 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.

QuasiUnaFantasia I don't think Steinway knows what Modartt are doing, apart from spreading the name Steinway across the internet.

Really? Okay, you people have no limits! IMHO!

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!

QuasiUnaFantasia Those who make the decisions at Steinway care about money first, last, and everywhere in between.

I think there are some truth to that but I also think that it is important for Steinway that their name is equal to excellence in peoples consciousness. It's not the first time Steinway collaborates with another product brand. They have a collaboration with the Danish high end audio company Lyngdorf (you if anyone probably know that) where they offer Steinway branded audio equipment:
https://lyngdorf.steinwaylyngdorf.com/about-us/

There's not much to be read about Modartts collaboration with Steinway but Modartt seems to have collaboration with other piano companies from their piano selection that goes beyond just branding and advertising especially Petrof and Steingraeber.

Here's from Petrofs website:
https://www.petrof.com/pianoteq

Here's from Steingraebers website:
https://www.steingraeber.de/en/2018/06/pianoteq-releases-steingraeber-sound/

johanibraaten There's not much to be read about Modartts collaboration with Steinway but Modartt seems to have collaboration with other piano companies from their piano selection that goes beyond just branding and advertising especially Petrof and Steingraeber,

Oh yeah, I forgot about these two, Petrof & Steingraeber, and I wonder, do they know what Modartt is doing?

You still don’t get a very simple point. A sampled piano records a real piano. They don’t need you to believe in a fairy tale. A modeled piano is desperate to convince you that they didn’t just turn a bunch of knobs from their alleged Petrof to turn it into an alleged Steingraeber, something all the aficionados believe is possible and want you to believe all day long. Because how will then Modartt ask you for yet another €50 for just a bunch of knob turns 😉 Which is why Modart are left with the only option: to pay to these brands as a last marketing resort.

IMHO

Imagine just for a moment that Modartt decided to EQ the Petrof and sell it as a Steinway 😉 Are Steinway going to catch the fraud? How? Is there anyone at Steinway that can solve partial differential equations, so that Philippe can show his equations?

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? A sampled piano at least shows you a picture of engineers with mics in a studio recording the source piano. What is Modartt showing you to prove their genuine new model? Can we see the actual piano they modeled and the ruler they measured it with? Any spectral analyses they did to the wood? Did they take it apart? Did Steinway help them in that?

No need to answer 😉 Are you still not getting it why Pianoteq is in a desperate need of brand endorsement?

IMHO

johanibraaten It's not the first time Steinway collaborates with another product brand. They have a collaboration with the Danish high end audio company Lyngdorf (you if anyone probably know that)

Actually, I had no idea. 🙂

Pete14 Oh yeah, I forgot about these two, Petrof & Steingraeber, and I wonder, do they know what Modartt is doing?

Undoubtedly. But Steinway is an entirely different beast; it's one of the most cynical, bullying companies ever. They don't want to woo the world via excellence, they use more brutal methods for it. They went for decades with their New York instruments being deemed second tier, and they apparently couldn't care less, consistently bragging about their extreme excellence.

I think to this day instruments leaving the New York factory are not in a playable condition (I could be wrong about it, but there has been a lot of talk about it in PW).

I believe their view is this: if it carries the name Steinway, then it is the best in the world, no matter any evidence to the contrary.

CyberGene

Well, then, we have but one way to clear this whole thing up: call on Philippe himself!

Surely, he lurks ‘round here, so I ask thee, Philippe, would you be so kind as to set the record straight for these people?

Now, about these pictures “showing engineers with mics in a studio” (and I’m sure there also exists a picture or two of them engineers turning knobs and such), I’ll say this: you do know we have pictures of people landing on the moon, don’t you? (Okay, I went a little conspiracy-theorist there, but still, how do we know these “engineers” aren’t simply hired models pretending to be, well, recording a piano. I’m sure you’ll agree that these “engineers” in the pictures are simply too handsome, and I’ve never met a handsome engineer, ever, so there’s that)!

My point, if we can purportedly make a modeled Steinway sound like a Steingraeber, I don’t see how the real engineers at VSL can’t make a BallsandDorfer sound like, well, a Steinway (or the other way around); surely, they have the blueprint, so moving things a little to the left/right from a programming standpoint (and not just simple parameter tweaking) is very much possible, and now that I think of it…..🤔

IMHO!

Pete14 exactly my point. With sampling you can make the same fraud and people will trust you. With modeling you have to pay for brand names. Glad you finally got it. IMHO 😃

CyberGene

Okay, we have to tread carefully here, so, to protect us from litigation, let’s say that “allegedly it appears that this double-dipping practice is possible in theory,” but in no way are we saying that this is the case (there, I saved us from a lawsuit)….

But I have to say, in general, the piano as we know it isn’t as unique as some would have you believe, and making one sound like the other isn’t that much of a stretch; heck, Glenn Gould made his Steinway sound like a cross between a piano and a harpsichord, and he didn’t even have a VST, so if he were alive today, he’d certainly be working out some interesting concoctions….

Can we at least agree that tweaking your existing Steinway VST can indeed be all you need?

IMHO!

Pete14 that’s where modeling shot itself in the foot. They first tell you you can make any piano with that bunch of knobs and how lame the sampled pianos are because they have no bunch of knobs, figuratively speaking. Then they realize the sampled libraries can sell you a Steinway, a CFX, a Bosie, etc and are making tons of money, whereas they can’t sell you new models. Oopsie! Hence the fairy tales.