Pianoteq - Hands On: NY Steinway D

Great playing!

Regarding PTQ: I regard it as a synth with piano characteristics. Does it matter? Hell no. I like playing synths. I just don't agree that it sounds like the original - unless you don't do a very close and direct comparison. So I don't really see the need to acquire and use it. Also, I don't think it's worth what they demand in terms of price: they sell every piano preset on its own and if you want that handful of presets altogether, they rip you off like there is no tomorrow (799€). That's the main reason I will never buy it: it's IMHO simply overpriced for what it is. Sell the entire piano package for 149€ and I might (!) rethink it. However, I'm not sure of that, because even for 149€ I'm not seeing the advantage of it…. Garritan CFX and Modern U… not sure why I'd need more piano-wise. Maybe VSL Imperial? But until now, I can't really make out the big difference to the CFX, at least not one that would make me switch.

Mta88 Thank you!

MrGr My unscientific observations are:

1) In general, outside of specialized forums, and with nothing to compare to, no one picks up on the synthesis aspects... Pianoteq passes for a regular piano.
2) It's getting harder and harder to identify Pianoteq vs non-Pianoteq, not impossible, but more and more people are getting fooled or confused even on the specialized forums.
3) People accustomed to acoustic pianos are perfectly content with Pianoteq, transition seamlessly, and even prefer it over other digital alternatives.
4) Some of the best sampled VIs are starting to sound more and more like Pianoteq. The VSL 280VC comes to mind.

I agree with your sentiment, that in the end, it's all about the music and making music. Garritan CFX and Modern U are satisfactory by all accounts. Collecting VIs is not a particularly fruitful pursuit in itself.

All things considered, Pianoteq seems to provide me with some additional musical value... I've had fun being able to customize my own piano to suit it to particular pieces.

navindra Collecting VIs is not a particularly fruitful pursuit in itself.

This hit me right in my head 😆

navindra Pianoteq passes for a regular piano.

Not here it doesn't.

Jose EB5AGV navindra Collecting VIs is not a particularly fruitful pursuit in itself.

This hit me right in my head 😆

My head too. I am going to like my collection like some people like their luxury pen collection when one pen is enough to write. But I have to admit that sometimes I like to rediscover one of my virtual piano… and have to admit few are very frequently used (VSL, Bechstein Digital Grand).

navindra 4) Some of the best sampled VIs are starting to sound more and more like Pianoteq. The VSL 280VC comes to mind.

True, and that's probably why I can't tolerate it for very long. I end up playing it for a while and then go back to the Bosendorfer Imperial.

God Bless,
David

navindra PTQ fools me, too. Unless I compare it note by note. And it fools me in probably any more realistic situation. I would tend to agree with you on that. Problem is: I know it's a synth. I'm simply not willing to buy singular synth presets for that amount of monies. That just seems not right to me. 😆

Jose EB5AGV This hit me right in my head

Instead PTQ users have to dump all their monies into single piano presets. Geeee. Now how's that for a difference! 😄

These are not ‘single piano presets’, how dare you!

These are unique -independent- pianos that happen to be part of the Pianoteq ecosystem, but not simple presets!

Go ahead, try to make the Steingraeber sound like the D, or even like the Bluthner……….how dare you!

MrGr I do have Pianoteq also… and a bunch of instruments packs 😅

So a bunch of friendly folks commented on my performance. These are all friendly and supportive folks over at PW, so I'll leave performance comments aside and focus on what can be purely attributed to Pianoteq.

The interesting thing is that people don't have to go out of their way to compliment something that's either not good or not notable. For example, I tried to record the best video I could, but no one comments on it because in the end it is not particularly good or noteworthy.

So what do people have to say, good or bad, about Pianoteq?

A very nice singing tone.

Beautiful piano sound.

Sounds good with your high tech manipulations.

Your piano sings.

What a delightful sound you get out of your piano.

Great piano sound.

Not a bad reflection on Pianoteq for folks who have no skin in the game. That's a fair number of comments on just the piano sound alone... it's almost like Pianoteq is too good for its own sake. 😆

Source: http://forum.pianoworld.com/ubbthreads.php/topics/3194308/recital-65-general-discussion-room.html

I have yet to comment in PW on your contribution (it will happen though), but there I am unlikely to comment on the piano sound in itself. However, listening to it now (very well played, by the way) I agree completely with the "singing tone" comments. In my view the stand-out feature of this sound is a long sustain which does not drop off in volume rapidly, unlike so many sampled piano's out there.

But, my personal experience with Pianoteq is that I get "ear fatigue" after a while, and I'm speculating that the reason for this is exactly that long sustain at high volume. This idea just came to me now, so it has not had time to be fully examined yet.

QuasiUnaFantasia I get "ear fatigue"

This is the first ive read of ear fatigue associated (and therefore possibly attributed to) with any make or model of VST played through a given DP/controller/computer/sound system.

Realizing there is often a fuzzy relationship between correlation & causation …. kinda like proof & pudding, between here & there ( mostly there) ive seen people often report & associate ear fatigue with quality of headphones strapped on to one’s head. While ive experienced this very thing - usually with my econo wired JBL phones monitoring utube vids but has also happened with my vintage Hi-Fi system plus or minus the more substantial & expensive Beyer phones monitoring CDs and or mp3s on my old PC …. and Walkman - i suspect the particular design/quality of phones/speakers/drivers plays a part but there are other variables that may/can/do play a part in the fuzzy formula ….. like the production/quality of content being played through some sort of amp & speakers small or big.

Having said alla that, the only skin i have in the VST game is virtual - all of you, my virtual friends who do or have tried various VSTs for better or worse - and includes @navindra at one extreme, so to speak, as well as @MacMacMac at another …… i’m sooooo confused 😱

Maybe I should clarify a bit; I see now that what I wrote could be understood differently from my intended meaning. To me, "ear fatigue" is not a bodily feeling of fatigue, it's a psycho-acoustical effect, so not my ears feel fatigued, but instead my mind. 🙂

QuasiUnaFantasia I have the same kind of ear fatigue effect while using Pianoteq, so you are not alone (I even described it with same words some time ago)

+1 regarding the mind fatigue. I always start testing a new release with the feeling of "that's not bad" only to end-up really fatigued. I don't know what it is but I guess the brain just can't be fooled well enough. I can only compare this to some 3D movies I've watched. They've been shot with regular cinema cameras and lenses (only using stereoscopic lenses). As a result there's some narrow depth of field and even when they try to shoot with as wide DoF as possible, there's still blurred focus outside of the main objects. And since the brain and eyes recieve 3D information, your eyes try to focus on the blurred portions since the brain gets fooled by the incoming depth information but is unable to focus because the blur is not caused by your eyes but is embedded within the image. I personally experience a headache 15 minutes after I start watching these 3D movies. Same thing with Pianoteq, there's something in the sound that attempts to fool the brain by giving it partially truthful "depth" while missing the rest of the information that "depth" backs up.

CyberGene Interesting theory, but I am not quite ready to buy it yet, because the inability of eyes to focus will lead to a lot of adjustments, which require muscular work. Fatigue seems a logical consequence. But the ears have no such muscular involvement (to the best of my knowledge, which admittedly is not much). On the other hand, sound does impact the inner ear in a mechanical way, so maybe there is something there anyway. Maybe the ear has some "protective measure", which gets activated a lot by Pianoteq.

Then again, why do some people happily play Pianoteq for hours feeling no discomfort at all?

QuasiUnaFantasia Then again, why do some people happily play Pianoteq for hours feeling no discomfort at all?

That’s the great mystery.

QuasiUnaFantasia because the inability of eyes to focus will lead to a lot of adjustments, which require muscular work. Fatigue seems a logical consequence.

In fact, there is some neuroscientists that hold the theory that pain (fatigue) does not come from stress (as in "muscular work") but is a warning signal about sensorial incongruences. Phantom limb pain is one example: stump nerves say "you have a leg" while the eyes say "no, you don't..." Pain does not solve the incongruence, but focus our attention to its importance. The same could be said of uncommon sensorial experiences.

It seems as if casual listeners of the end recording do not generally perceive this fatigue effect.

It's also worth calling out this final rendering is with an audience perspective but the actual performance was recorded with a player perspective with less mics and no reverb.

Is it fair to say an acoustic grand piano can be fatiguing as well? I personally believe so. I visited a piano shop a few days ago for less than hour. By the time I was done, I was pretty fatigued.

The amount of reverberation and resonance that comes at you from an acoustic is tremendous. Not surprising that it might be fatiguing.