1

Topic: Pianoteq 6

Hello Modartt,

When can we expect Pianoteq 6 to be released?
What pianos will it include?

Is there a way to get into a beta testing group?

Thank you,
Moshe.

2

Re: Pianoteq 6

That's a question for this guy:


PunBB bbcode test

3

Re: Pianoteq 6

bmoshe wrote:

Hello Modartt,

When can we expect Pianoteq 6 to be released?
What pianos will it include?

Is there a way to get into a beta testing group?

Thank you,
Moshe.

Straight to the point Bmoshe, I like that, +1 from me, and no negative answers from unauthorized users please, just prayers smile

4

Re: Pianoteq 6

Seems like we're overdue, based on previous release history.

I'm hoping for Musikmesse in April.

5

Re: Pianoteq 6

Am I the only one who does not want a new version for at least several months? I just upgraded (2 months ago) from stage to standard I don't want to be tempted to pay again for an upgrade. smile

Last edited by Lucy (15-02-2017 22:21)

6

Re: Pianoteq 6

i really dont think they can improve much with version 6. that is, unless it takes the resources of a considerably more powerful cpu, than the current bottom line specification, and then, how much better will it be ? they are at the top of their game. they already know all the mathematical formulas and their permutations. it is simply just how many can be computed in real time with the current technology. they have been doing this for years. the maths has not changed. i would personally like to see more different instruments modelled in version 6, as the current other instruments are excellent.

7

Re: Pianoteq 6

red wrote:

i really dont think they can improve much with version 6. that is, unless it takes the resources of a considerably more powerful cpu, than the current bottom line specification, and then, how much better will it be ? they are at the top of their game. they already know all the mathematical formulas and their permutations. it is simply just how many can be computed in real time with the current technology. they have been doing this for years. the maths has not changed. i would personally like to see more different instruments modelled in version 6, as the current other instruments are excellent.

I have heard heavy soundfonts which personally I think sound more natural and realistic than Pianoteq. Pianoteq is noticeably more expressive though (one of the reasons I chose it). I think (my personal opinion) that Pianoteq sound is too pure!!! Not everything can be modeled into mathematical formulas, what can be considered as ''imperfections'' in the realm of mathematic is what makes acoustical pianos so special.

I guess the team behind Pianoteq deals with it with approximations or something similar, so there always will be room for improvement (a close friend told me that such models will always be limited because of Gödel's incompleteness theorems, I don't know heck what that is though smile ).

I suppose there will always be room for improvements, I just hope the improvement is not too soon. smile

Last edited by Lucy (16-02-2017 00:10)

8

Re: Pianoteq 6

Lucy wrote:

Not everything can be modeled into mathematical formulas, what can be considered as ''imperfections'' in the realm of mathematic is what makes acoustical pianos so special.

& this is exactly why we have all those sliders (unison width, octave stretching, direct sound, impedance, sympathetic resonance, damper position/duration, key and pedal noise, etc etc etc... not to mention all the randomization functions in the note editor, the "condition slider", and... you get the idea) to fine-tune all those marvelous imperfections that make an instrument (or anything really) unique, characteristic, natural, & pleasing/beautiful...

"perfection" is boring (& i'd personally include issues of temperament in that notion); beauty (following the japanese concept of wabi-sabi [侘寂]) lies in "the acceptance of transience and imperfection"... smile

Last edited by DaveyJones (16-02-2017 01:17)
Wahre Kunst bleibt unvergänglich.

9

Re: Pianoteq 6

For me, recordings of Pianoteq's recent piano models have already met the test of indistinguishability from recordings of an acoustic piano. I do prefer the sound of one make and model acoustic over another depending on repertoire. This has contributed to whether I prefer a particular Pianoteq model recording over a particular sampled library or acoustic recording, or vice versa. As for Godel, I think that it is more an emphasis on computability than incompleteness (they are however deeply intertwined). Nevertheless, as a practical matter, for me I think that Modartt has solved the computability aspect since I can't tell the difference. I continue to purchase sample libraries that are highly regarded seeing that Modartt does not have certain models as yet, and also as a matter of interest.

10

Re: Pianoteq 6

Lucy wrote:

Am I the only one who does not want a new version for at least several months? I just upgraded (2 months ago) from stage to standard I don't want to be tempted to pay again for an upgrade. smile

If I remember well, you will be allowed to get a free upgrade to the new version within 6 months of your purchase.

I bought my licence in february 2014 (version 4.5) and had acces to version 5 for free 3 months later when it came out.

11

Re: Pianoteq 6

DaveyJones wrote:

"perfection" is boring (& i'd personally include issues of temperament in that notion); beauty (following the japanese concept of wabi-sabi [侘寂]) lies in "the acceptance of transience and imperfection"... smile

And that's exactly why I think it would be a dream if Modartt could introduce in their models small imperfections randomly different from one day to another and a continuous detuning from one week to another... wink

12

Re: Pianoteq 6

stamkorg wrote:
DaveyJones wrote:

"perfection" is boring (& i'd personally include issues of temperament in that notion); beauty (following the japanese concept of wabi-sabi [侘寂]) lies in "the acceptance of transience and imperfection"... smile

And that's exactly why I think it would be a dream if Modartt could introduce in their models small imperfections randomly different from one day to another and a continuous detuning from one week to another... wink

... and you can introduce all the [wabi-sabi] just as you are dreaming - just move that CONDITIONS slider to the right about 0.01" per day until it reaches the other end.  Then put on a new preset and start over!

;p)

Lanny

13

Re: Pianoteq 6

Hi
Yes, a bit detuning every now and then, a new preset and do it again. It is so fantastic that I can do it with Ptq, suddenly I have new pianos that no one created before. As an old retiree, I think nothing is so good that it cannot be made better. I am sure that Modartt strive for constant improvement. At least as I have learned, the mathematical formulas are endless. And Ptq 6 will come when they are ready, as we have seen every time before. And what kind of sound you want, - it is a of course a matter of what meets your own special needs. Well, thats what I think.

14

Re: Pianoteq 6

stamkorg wrote:

If I remember well, you will be allowed to get a free upgrade to the new version within 6 months of your purchase.

I bought my licence in february 2014 (version 4.5) and had acces to version 5 for free 3 months later when it came out.

Modartt has stated in the FAQ that you are entitled for upgrades for one year after your purchase:

"Will my licence be entitled to a free future upgrade?
Yes, all our products come with one year of free upgrades of the same product from the date of your first activation. You can read the complete sales conditions here: English | French."

15

Re: Pianoteq 6

tfort wrote:
stamkorg wrote:

If I remember well, you will be allowed to get a free upgrade to the new version within 6 months of your purchase.

I bought my licence in february 2014 (version 4.5) and had acces to version 5 for free 3 months later when it came out.

Modartt has stated in the FAQ that you are entitled for upgrades for one year after your purchase:

"Will my licence be entitled to a free future upgrade?
Yes, all our products come with one year of free upgrades of the same product from the date of your first activation. You can read the complete sales conditions here: English | French."

Hmmm... I think a new release is long overdue then. smile

16

Re: Pianoteq 6

bmoshe wrote:

When can we expect Pianoteq 6 to be released?
What pianos will it include?

Sorry to say, but they'll never tell you this in advance. Ever.

Is there a way to get into a beta testing group?

All I can do is guess, as I'm not a member of the beta testing group, but my guess is that if you consistently make great input into this site, input that shows that you have the requisite knowledge and abilities and are the type of person who can make the input that is needed from beta testers, that they'll ask you. For instance, peruse EvilDragon's posting history to get an idea of just what I mean.

17

Re: Pianoteq 6

fubarable wrote:
bmoshe wrote:

When can we expect Pianoteq 6 to be released?
What pianos will it include?

Sorry to say, but they'll never tell you this in advance. Ever.

Is there a way to get into a beta testing group?

All I can do is guess, as I'm not a member of the beta testing group, but my guess is that if you consistently make great input into this site, input that shows that you have the requisite knowledge and abilities and are the type of person who can make the input that is needed from beta testers, that they'll ask you. For instance, peruse EvilDragon's posting history to get an idea of just what I mean.

Any reason for you to give an answer instead of Modartt ? If they won`t give an direct answer, then they won`t. Any answer from Modartt is suitable. Is it a problem for anyone to ask ?  I wish that you read my first post here.

Last edited by slobajudge (18-02-2017 13:38)

18

Re: Pianoteq 6

slobajudge wrote:

Any reason for you to give an answer instead of Modartt ? If they won`t give an direct answer, then they won`t. Any answer from Modartt is suitable. Is it a problem for anyone to ask ?  I wish that you read my first post here.

Yes, I read your post first and yes, there's a great reason for me to give an answer: I wanted to. This is a forum where any of us are free to express our views, you and me, as long as those views are not insulting or degrading. You can't and shouldn't try to control what I post and visa versa -- I won't try to control your posts. If you think that my post will in some way scare Modartt from expressing their views, then you are greatly mistaken in the scope of my abilities and powers. Instead let's all agree to share our views and our love of music.

Peace out. smile

Last edited by fubarable (18-02-2017 14:44)

19

Re: Pianoteq 6

fubarable wrote:
slobajudge wrote:

Any reason for you to give an answer instead of Modartt ? If they won`t give an direct answer, then they won`t. Any answer from Modartt is suitable. Is it a problem for anyone to ask ?  I wish that you read my first post here.

Yes, I read your post first and yes, there's a great reason for me to give an answer: I wanted to. This is a forum where any of us are free to express our views, you and me, as long as those views are not insulting or degrading. You can't and shouldn't try to control what I post and visa versa -- I won't try to control your posts. If you think that my post will in some way scare Modartt from expressing their views, then you are greatly mistaken in the scope of my abilities and powers. Instead let's all agree to share our views and our love of music.

Peace out. smile

I dont want to control anything here, my first post was given in a good faith my friend, but you was so negative so I just ask you why and your answer was that you wanted to be a little modartt. Now dont be angry, I agree with your post now that you explain that to me smile

Last edited by slobajudge (18-02-2017 15:00)

20

Re: Pianoteq 6

slobajudge wrote:

Now dont be angry, I agree with your post now that you explain that to me smile

Thank you for your reply and glad to remain friends with you. smile

21

Re: Pianoteq 6

If you want an answer directly from Modartt, then go to their support page and ask them.

My strong impression is that they are a conscientious bunch and won't do a major release just for the sake of doing so and keeping up the hype. They will do it when they feel it's good and read and worthy of doing so.

But seriously, if you ask them directly, I'm sure you'll get an honest answer. They're not a big software company like Microsoft or any such. They are a small bunch of lovely maths, physics and computer science nerds working hard on this difficult problem of modelling complex acoustic instruments.

Last edited by SteveLy (25-02-2017 17:43)
3/2 = 5

22

Re: Pianoteq 6

It occurs to me to mention something about version numbers in computer software.

Some of you may be expecting version 6 because you think we're getting close with version 5.8.

However in computer software you typically have a major and minor version numbers.  The major number for Pianoteq is current 5, the minor number is 8.  But minor numbers can keep increasing so if Pianoteq want to they can keep making small changes to 5 and get 5.9, 5.10, 5.11, 5.12 and so on.  Major version number changes could be some way off.

I think that the reception of the Grotrian shows that they've pretty much nailed the sound modeling and I'm not sure how much refinement we can realistically expect from now on - it's much harder to squeeze the last drop of juice than the first.

Personally I'm wondering if the Blüthner will get an update.  It's designed for PTQ 4.2 so I can't help wondering if they'll update it to a 5+ model.  Of course I'm not sure it even needs an update - haven't heard anyone complaining about the existing model, and if they updated it, would people like it as much ?  But I'm wondering anyway.  Who can resist the update guessing game ?

23

Re: Pianoteq 6

twl wrote:

For me, recordings of Pianoteq's recent piano models have already met the test of indistinguishability from recordings of an acoustic piano

I have been following Pianoteq since version 1, i have been upgrading every version since version 3,  this is an impressing project, but i can hear that a sound piece is played with Pianoteq during the two or three first seconds of the playback, and i'm far to having golden ears.
There are definitely improvments between each versions, but we are very far from "indistinguisahability" imho, and i am wondering if we will be there someday in the near future.

24

Re: Pianoteq 6

vjau wrote:
twl wrote:

For me, recordings of Pianoteq's recent piano models have already met the test of indistinguishability from recordings of an acoustic piano

I have been following Pianoteq since version 1, i have been upgrading every version since version 3,  this is an impressing project, but i can hear that a sound piece is played with Pianoteq during the two or three first seconds of the playback, and i'm far to having golden ears.
There are definitely improvments between each versions, but we are very far from "indistinguisahability" imho, and i am wondering if we will be there someday in the near future.

I agree with you, every different instrument in pianoteq have something in common. This is more apparent when notes are played in certain speed and/or certain ranges of keys (less apparent in the lowest frequencies with tweaks). A geek told me that when it is so generalized it is due to the way the sound is generated in the engine itself.

For this reason I personally combine pianoteq with heavy soundfonts where it is more appropriate. I personally believe that when speed is needed and less expression, heavy soundfonts are better. This is my personal opinion. I therefore jump from pianoteq to soundfont for the same piece, segments being merged in Audacity. Other times I merge (more than one layer) same segment.

There is no one perfect instrument, if there was everyone would be using the same. The goal is for me to mask its origin in the final product.

Last edited by Lucy (28-02-2017 17:45)

25

Re: Pianoteq 6

vjau wrote:

but we are very far from "indistinguisahability" imho, and i am wondering if we will be there someday in the near future.

"Very far"? I don't think so, at all.

Hard work and guts!

26

Re: Pianoteq 6

sjgcit wrote:

It occurs to me to mention something about version numbers in computer software.

Some of you may be expecting version 6 because you think we're getting close with version 5.8.

However in computer software you typically have a major and minor version numbers.  The major number for Pianoteq is current 5, the minor number is 8.  But minor numbers can keep increasing so if Pianoteq want to they can keep making small changes to 5 and get 5.9, 5.10, 5.11, 5.12 and so on.  Major version number changes could be some way off.

I think we're expecting version 6 soon because it's inline with recent historical patterns for Modartt.

If you look at the version history at https://www.pianoteq.com/changelog, you'll see that full version updates came after 1.0.4, 2.3.0, 3.6.8, and 4.5.5. It was 22 months from version 2 to version 3, 38 months from version 3 to version 4, and 25 months from version 4 to version 5.

So far we're at version 5.8.1 and version 5 has been out for about 34 months. Past results are not necessarily an indicator of future performance and Modartt may change its pattern at any time, but a reasonable inference could be drawn that we're getting close to version 6...

27

Re: Pianoteq 6

Hi - as a newcomer to the Pianoteq universe ... what kind of things are generally introduced in new versions? New pianos? Other things also?

Thanks!

28

Re: Pianoteq 6

SmilingKeys wrote:

Hi - as a newcomer to the Pianoteq universe ... what kind of things are generally introduced in new versions? New pianos? Other things also?

Thanks!

Hi - Anyone? Not asking for a complete set of version histories, just sort of a general description of what new versions generally bring.

Thanks!

29

Re: Pianoteq 6

Until now,
Generally, some fine tweaking/tuning of the model itself (those parameters we don't have access) leading to a better/clearer/more real sound. This can be done for one particular model or for all.
Maybe 1 or two new instruments, or rebuilt from scratch an existing one.
Maybe some new functions to the software (a new effect, a better reverb model... this kind of things).

Personnally, I just use the classical pianos, I just wait for an improved global model, which is already fine.

If there is a version 6, it will be a test to see (hear!) if we can still hope some significant improvements from this technology.

Anyway, it will be interesting to hear it when (if) it will go out.

30

Re: Pianoteq 6

stamkorg wrote:

Until now,
Generally, some fine tweaking/tuning of the model itself (those parameters we don't have access) leading to a better/clearer/more real sound. This can be done for one particular model or for all.
Maybe 1 or two new instruments, or rebuilt from scratch an existing one.
Maybe some new functions to the software (a new effect, a better reverb model... this kind of things).

Personnally, I just use the classical pianos, I just wait for an improved global model, which is already fine.

If there is a version 6, it will be a test to see (hear!) if we can still hope some significant improvements from this technology.

Anyway, it will be interesting to hear it when (if) it will go out.

Thanks for the answer, stamkorg!

I went back and read some old SOS reviews as well, they said there was a real improvement in overall realism between 4 and 5. It will be exciting to listen for improvements in PT6 when it comes!

For those with better ears than mine ... is PT5 pretty good at sympathetic resonance? I'm not sure whether I'm using the correct term ... I'm referring when the pedal is down where one played note interacts with the strings of another note ... ?

31

Re: Pianoteq 6

SmilingKeys wrote:
stamkorg wrote:

Until now,
Generally, some fine tweaking/tuning of the model itself (those parameters we don't have access) leading to a better/clearer/more real sound. This can be done for one particular model or for all.
Maybe 1 or two new instruments, or rebuilt from scratch an existing one.
Maybe some new functions to the software (a new effect, a better reverb model... this kind of things).

Personnally, I just use the classical pianos, I just wait for an improved global model, which is already fine.

If there is a version 6, it will be a test to see (hear!) if we can still hope some significant improvements from this technology.

Anyway, it will be interesting to hear it when (if) it will go out.

Thanks for the answer, stamkorg!

I went back and read some old SOS reviews as well, they said there was a real improvement in overall realism between 4 and 5. It will be exciting to listen for improvements in PT6 when it comes!

For those with better ears than mine ... is PT5 pretty good at sympathetic resonance? I'm not sure whether I'm using the correct term ... I'm referring when the pedal is down where one played note interacts with the strings of another note ... ?

It is fair/good at that.
The wooden piano purists insist that it is "synthetic" and that it can never be the same as a physical wooden piano because ...just because it ISN'T a physical wooden piano big_smile

So far you can't do the demonstration of holding the pedal down, putting your mouth close to the strings and shouting to set them going.
You only have to stomp on the floor next to a wooden piano to get some resonances going, but who needs that in a model ?

I wouldn't expect THAT level of (useless) simulation of a physical piano for quite some time, not because it couldn't be done, but because it makes little/no sense to do it.

OTOH that might come as an unintended consequence of simulating feedback (of room acoustics).
Not a feature on my wish list.

32

Re: Pianoteq 6

.

Last edited by mabry (06-03-2017 21:40)

33

Re: Pianoteq 6

aandrmusic wrote:
SmilingKeys wrote:
stamkorg wrote:

Until now,
Generally, some fine tweaking/tuning of the model itself (those parameters we don't have access) leading to a better/clearer/more real sound. This can be done for one particular model or for all.
Maybe 1 or two new instruments, or rebuilt from scratch an existing one.
Maybe some new functions to the software (a new effect, a better reverb model... this kind of things).

Personnally, I just use the classical pianos, I just wait for an improved global model, which is already fine.

If there is a version 6, it will be a test to see (hear!) if we can still hope some significant improvements from this technology.

Anyway, it will be interesting to hear it when (if) it will go out.

Thanks for the answer, stamkorg!

I went back and read some old SOS reviews as well, they said there was a real improvement in overall realism between 4 and 5. It will be exciting to listen for improvements in PT6 when it comes!

For those with better ears than mine ... is PT5 pretty good at sympathetic resonance? I'm not sure whether I'm using the correct term ... I'm referring when the pedal is down where one played note interacts with the strings of another note ... ?

It is fair/good at that.
The wooden piano purists insist that it is "synthetic" and that it can never be the same as a physical wooden piano because ...just because it ISN'T a physical wooden piano big_smile

So far you can't do the demonstration of holding the pedal down, putting your mouth close to the strings and shouting to set them going.
You only have to stomp on the floor next to a wooden piano to get some resonances going, but who needs that in a model ?

I wouldn't expect THAT level of (useless) simulation of a physical piano for quite some time, not because it couldn't be done, but because it makes little/no sense to do it.

OTOH that might come as an unintended consequence of simulating feedback (of room acoustics).
Not a feature on my wish list.

I was reading a bit about some sampled pianos, in terms of "sympathetic resonance".

Apparently with some of those pianos, holding one key down while a second one is struck will cause the first key's strings to ring out.

I tried that with PianoTeq 5 (held down middle C while striking the C above it) - I didn't hear any ringing with middle C.

Does anyone else hear the "first note" ringing under circumstances like that?

34

Re: Pianoteq 6

Yes, that's also possible with Pianoteq, you might want to raise the Sympathetic resonance slider.

Hard work and guts!

35

Re: Pianoteq 6

In addition to EvilDragon's response  Pianoteq's model creates a sympathetic resonance in real time, depending upon which notes are struck, which held down with the pedal etc. Sampled pianos cannot do this: they would need samples for every conceivable combination/dynamic, i.e. an infinite number. I guess there must be an algorithm in play here, which is in effect modelling. Interesting question: how does Pianoteq's algorithm compare with with those used by sampled pianos?

Happy to be told I'm talking rubbish if I've got it all wrong.

36

Re: Pianoteq 6

SmilingKeys wrote:

I tried that with PianoTeq 5 (held down middle C while striking the C above it) - I didn't hear any ringing with middle C.

Does anyone else hear the "first note" ringing under circumstances like that?


Yes of course, and Pianoteq is probably the better of all piano softwares for sympathetic resonances.

You should strike and release the note very briefly, and then you will hear the other note resonance.

37

Re: Pianoteq 6

stamkorg wrote:
SmilingKeys wrote:

I tried that with PianoTeq 5 (held down middle C while striking the C above it) - I didn't hear any ringing with middle C.

Does anyone else hear the "first note" ringing under circumstances like that?


Yes of course, and Pianoteq is probably the better of all piano softwares for sympathetic resonances.

You should strike and release the note very briefly, and then you will hear the other note resonance.

Unfortunately, even doing this, I don't hear it. I have the Stage version, so it looks like I'm lacking the sympathetic resonance controller Evil Dragon  references.

That's OK, it would have been nice to have that feature, but for the level of work I put out, it's not a deal breaker in the least!

Thanks guys -

38

Re: Pianoteq 6

Yeah, for these kinds of adjustments you really need at least the Standard version.

Hard work and guts!

39

Re: Pianoteq 6

You can definitely hear it with Stage but it's easier to do it if you hold 1 key down silently first.  Then press a second key and compare the sound versus just pressing that second key alone.

40

Re: Pianoteq 6

red wrote:

i really dont think they can improve much with version 6. that is, unless it takes the resources of a considerably more powerful cpu, than the current bottom line specification, and then, how much better will it be ? they are at the top of their game. they already know all the mathematical formulas and their permutations. it is simply just how many can be computed in real time with the current technology. they have been doing this for years. the maths has not changed. i would personally like to see more different instruments modelled in version 6, as the current other instruments are excellent.

Agree, it is amazing what Moddart has done. Very realistic, highly adjustable, and low on the CPU. Furthermore, the repertoire of pianos and other instruments modelled is varied and growing, and all are excellent. (Further, the price of each is very fair - I never get the feeling that Moddart is gouging).  There is always room for improvement, but improvement of existing instruments now does occur at a marginal rate of return. So I agree with you that adding new instruments - for example, a couple more keyboard instruments, as well as perhaps another plucked/strummed instrument like a guitar to follow up on the harp - appears to be a good direction. I also would not mind seeing an extension of the range of some of the existing parameters (e.g., extend direct sound duration so that the volume of a struck note can increase over time), and perhaps an addition or two to the set of parameters - vibrato for example. Since it's a model, it should be unconstrained (up to a practical limit).

41

Re: Pianoteq 6

As per Pianoteq's Admin post in this thread: http://www.forum-pianoteq.com/viewtopic.php?id=4979:

Niclas Fogwall wrote:
tfort wrote:

MusikMesse 2017 is right around the corner. Will Modartt be represented in any way?

I did see that Tomeso, their German distributor, will be present.

No Pianoteq booth this year, but I will attend as Modartt representative on Wednesday (5th).
If interested in setting up an appointment, just send me a pm.

I'm going to go out on a limb and state that the odds of our seeing Pianoteq 6 presented at MusikMesse 2017 are very small.

sad

42

Re: Pianoteq 6

Hello All,

Regarding small imperfections in the piano models, here is an outline of some of the slight modifications I make to any given piano model on any given day.  Please realize this is done in Pianoteq PRO, and I specifically do NOT save .fxp's of my modifications.  The following slight modifications I make to any given Pianoteq model are based on decades of tuning real pianos, and noticing the wear patterns that accumulate after years of play on a given instrument:

1) Hammer Hardness:  Depending on who owns a given real piano, the hammers tend to be harder in the "grand staff" of the keyboard.  This is because most people play most of our notes in the central three or four octaves.  To mimic this hardness pattern, I gradually raise the hardness of all three hammer families from C2 to C4 (Middle C) and back down by the time I hit C6 (two octaves above middle C).  Next, I hit the click the "random(ize)" button to add slight additional random variation to the entire key range.

Please note:  I am not heavyhanded when making these changes; if you can "hear" individual hammers as being harder (or softer), then you have over-done the effect.


2) Hammer Noise:  In general, I use the same scheme for increasing hammer noise as is done for Hammer Hardness.  Restated, pianos become worn in the middle four octaves where they are most often played.

3) Strike Point:  Normally, this value is set by the piano designer throughout the entire key range.  However, I usually give a few clicks of the "random" button in the Pianoteq PRO Note Edit Screen.  Why?  The strike point contributes to the "tone color" of a given piano's design.  Although this is not normally changed (because it is fixed by the piano builder), I enjoy making a few clicks of the "Random" button to instill a very slight harmonic variation over the entire key range.

4)  Parameters that are most often left untouched:  Pickup Symmetry, Pickup Distance, Impedance, Cutoff, Q Factor, String Length, Blooming Energy and Inertia.  Why?  To my ears, they don't make "that much difference" when parameters are randomized with one or two clicks of the Random button.

5) Sympathetic Resonance, Duplex Scale Resonance:  If anything, I might raise the overall levels from 1,00 to approximately 1.20 (very little) and then randomize them with a few clicks of the Random button.  Personally, Duplex Scale is a "cure without a disease" invented as a marketing gimmick by Steinway & Sons.

6) Damper Position and Damping Duration:  Sometimes, I simply randomize the former with a few clicks of the Random button.  Why?  The damper position controls the harmonics of notes that are prominent when the note is released. 

Damping Duration is something quite different:  I have known the very lowest notes to continue to "sound" for a full half second or longer after the note has been released.  This is because the heaviest copper-wound strings have the most vibrational inertia, and should take a longer time to silence.  The highest notes have no dampers, so sometimes I will increase them, too.  And then randomize the entire key range.

7)  Key release noise:  In general, I tend to click the Random button about 4 or 5 times to impart a greater randomness to the volume of key release noise.  Pianos that are played more often over the years ... simply have noisier actions, even if those actions are carefully regulated.

8)  Volume, Detune and Unison Width:  Suffice to say, I give a few clicks to Randomize them.  Again, if the affect can be discerned, then the effect was done to excess.

* * * * * *

Please do not ask me for any fxp's of these settings, as I do a little of everything ... every time I start out with a new piano model.  It does me no good to save any of these randomizations.  In the earlier years of owning Pianoteq PRO, I tended to save everything.  Nowadays, it's more spontaneous for me to alter a piano's condition according to known wear characteristics.  The condition slider is intended to reproduce the above steps; however, I like to control my own instrument, rather than relying on someone else's concept of what aging consists of doing to the settings.

Hope this helps,

Joe

Last edited by jcfelice88keys (01-04-2017 23:57)

43

Re: Pianoteq 6

tks jcfelice88keys this is much appreciated, I'm saving your comment for future use... a product is nothing without users experiences and those kind of posts are very helpful.