Too son to talk about Pianoteq 6? (Page 1 of 2)

What I expect:
The current pianos will receive a soundboard model upgrade with one new model added, probably a Yamaha CF-series or similar ersatz (YCFX).

What I want (in addition):
Come on, it should be known by now from my posts ; a proper simulation of a long piano, like the Rubenstein R-371, Klavins 370, Steinmayer 440 (Xinghai), or the Alexander Stadium Grand. To be clear, that means a new piano model, and not a simple fxp. I also want the range of said piano to be expanded to 105 notes, though it's not required for the Rubenstein.

I also thought the same but who knows for sure? I am creating wild speculations in my mind that the new harp instruments will probably yield to a new particular piano model (perhaps a Bosie or a CFX).... A new upright would also also be welcome IMHO (one less Y and more european should do) or a good model for a 2m piano (a Steinway B).  Regarding EPs we need more detailed models (particularly regarding key noises) and a better preamp section.
Am I missing anything? Lol!

I'll be happy with any new classical grand piano, which is made as good, as Bluthner, and has different character. Also wait for upgrades of D4, as it is still far from real Steinway)
But the main expectation is refining and evolution of modeling engine (more complex attaca, more natural noises and timbre of fortissimo notes, a little bit smoother and content resonances, more complex air and environment modeling)

+1, the attack can be improved hopefully...

Viola Organista.

Different modeled instruments entirely -- Hammond B3 with a Leslie cabinet, brass/strings/woodwinds...

Are these modeled? Can the instrument set up be adjusted as flexibly and as powerfully as we can do with Pianoteq? Thanks!

Given that the package is 1.4GB, it will be primarily sampled. However, afaik there is some modelling on top of the samples and you can adjust a lot of things. Sampling can work much better for organ sounds than for piano. That said, it's a shame that a relatively easy-to-reverse-engineer electro-mechanical instrument like a tonewheel organ should be sampled rather than modelled. It's a fairly inexpensive package though.

A Baldwin 1.10 upright will be welcomed...

Wrong. VB3 is not a sample library, and it's a commercial venture, too. VB3 version 2 (as used in Crumar Mojo hardware clonewheel) is also going to happen, hopefully some time this year.

Also there is AIR Music Tech DB-33 that is modelled (AFAIK), but it's not as good as VB3.

The "currently developed professional caliber software instruments are merely sample libraries" part is wrong. Some of them are, some of them are not - those that I mentioned are still being developed, and are modelled, and professional too.

You can drag the EQ, effects and note edit windows out of Pianoteq's interface (and resize the note edit window, too)...

And no sooner did I post that, than Arturia entered the market with a virtual Hammond clone of their own. Today, May 19, 2016.

Wow.

https://www.arturia.com/products/analog...v/overview

Ironically, a real B3 has two sets of drawbars per manual, plus two drawbars for the pedalboard, which is conspicuously absent on the Arturia product.

Cheers,

Joe

Addendum:

1) On an actual B3 with tone-wheels - ever since the late 1930's, each DRAWBAR had its OWN contact wire - that is to say NINE output wires for each of the 2 sets of nine drawbars per manual.  These audio lines were routed through the keyboard switches before going to the preamp.

There are actually nine wires PER drawbar for each of the 2 sets of nine drawbars per manual!

Lanny

Velocity would provide for imparting a differential to the closure clicks for the stacked leaf contacts per key on that type of system.  However, to squeeze down and up slowly and hear the 9 drawbar pitches come in would require a proximity type of sensor such as QRS PnoScan, or Hall effect.

Either of these two would go a long way towards replicating B3 click transients.

Lanny

Those are nice as dreams, but they might be better provided by other programs, providing the MIDI or audio files for one to play along with in synch. Although others might have better comments about this subject, there might be a consideration of feature bloat (and therefore complexity, and perhaps more demands upon performance (such as maintaining low latency or number of independent voices of polyphony)). I personally love Pianoteq's current feature set and focus on several closely related goals. I greatly appreciate the MIDI recording facility, the metronome, the Note Edit functionality, the configurable MIDI control, the wonderful instruments, etc.

My primary fear I suppose is feature bloat, especially when those features might increase complexity and computing demands, while not being as often used as most features. It seems that many software packages have traditionally suffered from feature bloat, until people wish for something simpler, more dedicated to a specific purpose or tightly-related group of purposes.

These are merely my own thoughts, for whatever value they may or may not possess.

If I were going to practice a jazz piano solo and improvisation. I might pre-record a MIDI or audio file for bass and percussion (or find such a file online) and then have that file or tracks played back by an audio player application or MIDI sequencer, while I played the MIDI keyboard through Pianoteq or using a hardware tone generator in synch with the prerecorded tracks or file(s). I could then import the piano solo I was satisfied with into an audio recorder application (I use Ardour in Linux), and import the bass and percussion tracks, and then synch them to each other (regarding time).

By the way, there are many audio files available as practice and backing tracks for specialized musicians: for example bass and percussion tracks for pianists or guitar players to practice or play with. bass and piano tracks (audio files) for drum players to practice with, etc; many "minus one" tracks (the "minus one" being the instrument you play or are learning). One such source on the Internet is PlayJazzNow.com--

http://playjazznow.com/

---

Right click on the slider and you can then enter a value with the keyboard

You can do this (or rather, I can, using Pianoteq 5.6 in Linux). I click on a slider or node (such as in the velocity curve) and can nudge it horizontally or vertically (depending on slider direction) or in both directions (in the cases of nodes), using the up/down/left/right arrow buttons on my USB-connected keyboard, although in the Equalizer the nudging is limited to one arrow-key movement before the default keyboard shortcuts interpret the arrow keys left/right as moving forward or backward within the loaded MIDI file one step at a time. In the equalizer in the Effects section (the EQU3), the arrow keys do nudge the nodes up/down/right/left after clicking on one of the 3 nodes with the mouse.

That would really be exciting to know what Modart are working on atm and when we'll be able to see it. Do they do some press-releases of upcoming upgrades, like teasers or something? I don't mean right before they deliver it, but some sort of appetizer issued midway.

Sorry, can't see your point. First, Pianoteq not that bad atm so that long wait would seem reasonable for a potential buyer. And obviously after the next release there will be a new one, then another one - it's a continuous process. What the point to wait just for the next one? Let's better wait for 10 years, then it will be finally completed ))

Second, Modart offers free upgrades within a year from the moment of purchase anyway, and I believe minor upgrades are always free. And even after that year, upgrade costs not that much - 20 euros.

You can do it in the main EQ as well.

MODARTT,

This is your chance to record an actual 92 key Steinway, sure the brand's Petrof, but the sound's basically the same.

http://www.danielphilippstotz.info/?page_id=2382

Sorry to ask, according to chronology,  I am so impatient for version 6. Any news, release date maybe ?