1

Topic: .fxp wanted

Pianoteq 6 sounds very good.

However, i search this kind of sound (old Steinway):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wj1xQUUJ94U

for sure, a .fxp for Pianoteq 6 could achieve this goal.

smile

2

Re: .fxp wanted

You could start with the same mic placement as show in this video, and the same mic bran (or close if possible).


The day I could play the 3rd Moviment of Monlight Sonata, I will be able I play piano and not that I just play for fun in piano.

3

Re: .fxp wanted

Or an fxp for this, also played by Ms. Laird. A darker sound with more midrange and bass. But also an older piano sound, on a different piano. (Perhaps?) I'm not even sure that this is a Steinway, Olivier, but I hope I'm not hijacking your thread. The room, at least, is different. Or is it the different mics and mic placement that make it sound so unlike the first video, along with the very different piece and thus the attack?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhiXfEr7t08

EDIT: The rounded extrusions above the cheeks appear on Chickerings, but perhaps on other older pianos, too? (The rounded extrusions such as the one that the vase of roses or tulips sits on.) Now I fear that I AM taking the thread in another direction. My apologies. The connection is of course with the older piano sound, and with the same pianist playing in both videos. (I've asked on YouTube what piano is being played. I'll post if she responds.)

Last edited by Jake Johnson (24-09-2017 23:30)

4

Re: .fxp wanted

Her chair, to me, seems way too far from the piano, which results in somewhat of a bad posture. At least I wouldn't feel comfortable playing that far from the piano... Guess it works for her somehow, but I fear about her back, eventually.

Otherwise, very very nice chops! smile

Last edited by EvilDragon (02-10-2017 22:29)
Hard work and guts!

5

Re: .fxp wanted

Jake Johnson wrote:

A darker sound with more midrange and bass. But also an older piano sound, on a different piano

It is the same piano, NY Steinway. The mics are completely different between two videos. Also the room might be the same, but the curtains were definitely changed to thicker ones (better absorbing reflections).

Also in the message at the end of first video I see some analog preamps in the rack behind her, probably mics going into that, then into computer wink

Last edited by EvilDragon (12-09-2017 22:35)
Hard work and guts!

6

Re: .fxp wanted

Yep I love a good closely mic'd piano. (I prefer Jake's one here)

Greg.

7

Re: .fxp wanted

EvilDragon wrote:
Jake Johnson wrote:

A darker sound with more midrange and bass. But also an older piano sound, on a different piano

It is the same piano, NY Steinway. The mics are completely different between two videos. Also the room might be the same, but the curtains were definitely changed to thicker ones (better absorbing reflections).

Also in the message at the end of first video I see some analog preamps in the rack behind her, probably mics going into that, then into computer wink


Not so sure that it's the same piano. Look at the round "extrusion" that the vase of roses sits on. You may have to expand the video to full page to see that the piano has one each side. The piano in the first video doesn't have these. They could be attached to the desk, though.

Last edited by Jake Johnson (12-09-2017 22:42)

8

Re: .fxp wanted

Olivier_Frappier wrote:

Pianoteq 6 sounds very good.

However, i search this kind of sound (old Steinway):

Doesn't the preset, Steinway B Gentle, get you somewhere near, as a starting point?
I have just uploaded a version, with the mics placed sorta where they are in the videos wink.

Mac Pro Quad-Core (2009) 2.66 GHz | 16GB RAM | MOTU PCI-424/2408mk3|MOTU Midi Timepiece AV | Mac OS X 10.9.5 | Cubase 9.0.30.266| and others ;)

9

Re: .fxp wanted

vic_france wrote:
Olivier_Frappier wrote:

Pianoteq 6 sounds very good.

However, i search this kind of sound (old Steinway):

Doesn't the preset, Steinway B Gentle, get you somewhere near, as a starting point?
I have just uploaded a version, with the mics placed sorta where they are in the videos wink.


A recording, please?

10

Re: .fxp wanted

Jake Johnson wrote:
EvilDragon wrote:
Jake Johnson wrote:

A darker sound with more midrange and bass. But also an older piano sound, on a different piano

It is the same piano, NY Steinway. The mics are completely different between two videos. Also the room might be the same, but the curtains were definitely changed to thicker ones (better absorbing reflections).

Also in the message at the end of first video I see some analog preamps in the rack behind her, probably mics going into that, then into computer wink


Not so sure that it's the same piano. Look at the round "extrusion" that the vase of roses sits on. You may have to expand the video to full page to see that the piano has one each side. The piano in the first video doesn't have these. They could be attached to the desk, though.

That extrusion looks like an attachment rather than a part of the piano to me. Actually, looks like it's the embellished music rack.

Last edited by EvilDragon (12-09-2017 23:13)
Hard work and guts!

11

Re: .fxp wanted

Comparison little of a piece with Pianoteq with similar microphone settings ..
http://www.forum-pianoteq.com/uploads.p … econds.mp3
the sound on the pedal at the end produces a little synthesis .

12

Re: .fxp wanted

scherbakov.al wrote:

Comparison little of a piece with Pianoteq with similar microphone settings ..
http://www.forum-pianoteq.com/uploads.p … econds.mp3
the sound on the pedal at the end produces a little synthesis .


Lovely sound. Will you be uploading the fxp?

13

Re: .fxp wanted

Jake Johnson

http://www.forum-pianoteq.com/file/5e1x88pm

Done)

14

Re: .fxp wanted

Although not as technically brilliant, how does the sound quality of this recording of the same piece (3rd movement of Beethoven's "Moonlight" sonata, no. 27) seem in comparison to Marnie Laird's performance and recording in the YouTube video above?

http://picosong.com/wwqSw

Last edited by Stephen_Doonan (13-09-2017 01:02)

15

Re: .fxp wanted

vic_france: thanks for your FXP - I just tried it, and it's very nice, HOWEVER, the sound is not completely clear and transparent like a real recording. To try and remedy that, I try making the sound brighter (using either the soundboard settings or EQ etc), but then the sound starts to become unnatural. 

Greg.

16

Re: .fxp wanted

Stephen: FWIW, I can't hear any problems with your recording (didn't listen to the whole thing though) but I don't like the sound very much. (I can't always tell the real thing from Pianoteq, but I CAN always say what I like and don't like ;^) 
EDIT: I forgot to add that the sound is muffled and dry.

Greg.

Last edited by skip (13-09-2017 00:26)

17

Re: .fxp wanted

EvilDragon wrote:
Jake Johnson wrote:
EvilDragon wrote:

It is the same piano, NY Steinway. The mics are completely different between two videos. Also the room might be the same, but the curtains were definitely changed to thicker ones (better absorbing reflections).

Also in the message at the end of first video I see some analog preamps in the rack behind her, probably mics going into that, then into computer wink


Not so sure that it's the same piano. Look at the round "extrusion" that the vase of roses sits on. You may have to expand the video to full page to see that the piano has one each side. The piano in the first video doesn't have these. They could be attached to the desk, though.

That extrusion looks like an attachment rather than a part of the piano to me. Actually, looks like it's the embellished music rack.

You're right about it being a Steinway. See this video at 0:11 seconds:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFtaQ9F … mp;index=9


An old one, too, judging from that decal. She does get a good recorded sound on that piano.

Olivier: Do you like this sound, too, if we can distinguish the sound from the piece?

Last edited by Jake Johnson (13-09-2017 00:40)

18

Re: .fxp wanted

skip wrote:

vic_france: thanks for your FXP - I just tried it, and it's very nice, HOWEVER, the sound is not completely clear and transparent like a real recording. To try and remedy that, I try making the sound brighter (using either the soundboard settings or EQ etc), but then the sound starts to become unnatural. 

Greg.

I was merely suggesting a starting point for the request from the original poster, having listened (briefly wink ) to the second video (which is a much softer sound than the first one.. can't remember now why I chose that one neutral, maybe was in too much of a rush).

Mac Pro Quad-Core (2009) 2.66 GHz | 16GB RAM | MOTU PCI-424/2408mk3|MOTU Midi Timepiece AV | Mac OS X 10.9.5 | Cubase 9.0.30.266| and others ;)

19

Re: .fxp wanted

skip wrote:

... muffled and dry.

I think I can understand the "muffled," meaning the opposite of tinny or like fingernails grating on a chalkboard, right, or the treble harshness so many first-generation digital-audio CD's were criticized for? (However, you might describe the latter type of sound as well-defined with a "metallic shimmer," I suppose.) smile But dry--I'm guessing you are referring to the ambience of the room in which the recording was made, correct? The reverb, etc.?

Last edited by Stephen_Doonan (13-09-2017 01:09)

20

Re: .fxp wanted

Stephen: yes, what you said is about right. I like to hear the steel of the strings in the sound. For example, a steel-stringed guitar sounds more steely than a nylon stringed guitar - I like the steel string sound more.  There are other aspects too - it's not only that. I can definitely enjoy very mellow piano sounds too - I can't describe accurately why I like particular sounds and not others.

Greg.

Last edited by skip (13-09-2017 04:13)

21

Re: .fxp wanted

I've written Marnie and Patrick Laird to ask for information about the piano and mics and the recording of these videos. I asked\invited them to post here. I can only cross my fingers and hope that we hear from them.

22

Re: .fxp wanted

scherbakov.al wrote:

Jake Johnson

http://www.forum-pianoteq.com/file/5e1x88pm

Done)

Many thanks for uploading this. I just listened for the second time to the recording you posted using this fxp, and I like it even more now. (Did you play the piece? I only heard what appeared on the forum. Any plans on playing the entire piece soon? And creating a MIDI file for it...  :-)

23

Re: .fxp wanted

Hi all! Jake Johnson reached out to us and I figured I'd jump in to say hi and give a little clarity on our setup.

The piano is indeed a Steinway B grand. And, although it looks quite old, it's actually a 2007. It's a limited edition Henry Ziegler Steinway Model B they did for his birthday. Marnie much preferred the feel and action of the newer Steinway pianos and after trying dozens of model Bs, she was immediately drawn to this one. We're really happy with the sound of it, but as with most Steinways, it's a bit of a dark piano. With our music, that's not as ideal, so we have to do a little work to brighten up the piano and thin it out a tad to fit it into the mix. That's not as big of a problem with the solo piano stuff though (Moonlight, Intermezzo, etc.).

With regard to our tracking and mixing setup, we take a much more modern approach. We're placing the mics much closer than your typical classical recordist. In Intermezzo, we're using a pair of AKG 451s. I can't remember if we had room mics in that one, but I don't think so. Since that video, we've upgraded to a matched pair of Peluso P12 tube mics, which I LOVE on piano. They allow me a lot more flexibility with EQ too, as they seem to capture more data than the 451s. This is the setup on the Moonlight recording and I think I have the 451s as room mics on that one.

We're using Millennia pres on the piano too, and Vintech for the room. Apogee Symphony for AD/DA. Also, I should mention that the room is pretty well treated, despite most of the treatment is not seen in the videos (there are about 30 bass traps in that room and some diffusion).

Jake asked about compression too - I use compression fairly liberally on all of our pop stuff and some on the classical stuff. And I mess a lot with EQ to brighten the piano in all of our recordings and sometimes dip out some bothersome frequencies in some of the tunes.

Anyway, hope that helps. And thanks for sharing our videos!

Patrick

24

Re: .fxp wanted

Hello All,

I took some liberties with the audio from Ms. Laird's YouTube video of Brahms' Intermezzo in A Major Opus 118 No. 2 (refer to Item #3 in this thread), capturing the first four bars worth, and then comparing it with my own rendition of the same excerpt via Pianoteq 6.0.1.

In a different thread, I explained how the Steinway M's state of tuning in that particular video (NOT indicative of all Steinways, mind you) contained notes whose unisons were rather out of tune.  So here is what I did:

In Pianoteq 6 PRO, I raised the Unison Width of the same offending notes in the octaves between C3 and B4 to approximately 2.00 (as shown by the vertically extended yellow lines in the Pianoteq PRO note-by-note editing window).  Next, I played the same opening four bars of the Brahms Intermezzo, and force-synchonized the audio of Ms. Laird's Youtube version to play along with mine in Apple Logic Pro X.  Then I played each audio excerpt several times, alternating two repetitions each between Pianoteq Steinway Recording 2 with PRO modified Unison Detuning, and Ms. Laird's home Steinway M. 

Here is the Url:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nvvxwnk-tyg

As you watch the video, please keep an eye on the moving cursor:  This is used to highlight which instrument is playing at any given time.  The video begins by playing Ms. Laird's acoustic Model M piano excerpt twice, followed by three repetitions of Pianoteq Steinway B; returning to two excerpts each of the Steinway M and Pianoteq Steinway B.  In retrospect, if anything, I did NOT move the Unison Width sliders quite high enough to duplicate the poor unison tunings of certain notes of the Steinway M. (*)


Of course, the dynamics do not match exactly, the microphone placement of the Steinway B Recording 2 preset was different than the Brooklyn Duo's setup, and the timing is somewhat off, but the point is that Pianoteq 6 Steinway B with modified Unison Detuning is capable of sounding amazingly close to the audio from the real Steinway M.  It is not exact; nor does it claim to be an exact match.  (Besides, a Steinway Model M is 5'7" in length, whereas a Model B Studio Grand piano is just under 7 feet in length -- not quite a fair "Apples with Apples" comparison.)


This is only one person's attempt in the span of about an hour's time to use Pianoteq to compare with a real Steinway M.

Enjoy,

Joe

EDIT:
(*)  Upon going back to the Pianoteq modified preset, when the detuning slider was increased to between 2.50 and about 2.75, I WAS able to duplicate the comparatively "sour" sound of detuned unisons heard in the Steinway M video.  Just for fun, upon further increasing the Unison Detuning slider to approximately 4.00, then the effect became grotesquely distorted.  (Please note that none of these subsequent antics are presented in the above YouTube video.)

Interestingly, the more the video switches back from Pianoteq to Steinway M in the video, the worse the actual Steinway M's unison detuning sounds to my ears.  My opinion only; but please realize that I am a piano tuner, so I am accutely aware of this effect, probably more so than most people.

My apologies to the Laird/BrooklynDuo household for using the sound of their very fine quality Steinway M as an audio guinea pig, without their knowledge or permission given beforehand.


End EDIT

Last edited by jcfelice88keys (25-09-2017 20:45)

25

Re: .fxp wanted

Very interesting comparison, Joe. It was generous of you to take the time to do this.

And thank you, Patrick, for posting your comments in this discussion, especially about the microphones you use.

Last edited by Stephen_Doonan (25-09-2017 18:37)

26

Re: .fxp wanted

Joe,

Did you see the post from Patrick, the male side of the Brooklyn Duo, just above your post? I think that you were both posting at about the same time. He mentions some things that may be of interest about the recording, including the mics. (It's a Steinway B, as it turns out, and a fairly recent one, he says.) Well, you will want to read his post for yourself.

Last edited by Jake Johnson (26-09-2017 02:24)

27

Re: .fxp wanted

Hello Jake,

Yes, I did read Patrick's post after having made my own.  Interestingly, he multitracked his own audio -- which explains why he and Marley were wearing headphones in the video.  There is a second bass line he plays, which is doubled by Marley's left hand; also there are some percussive tracks added to the performance, presumably by his tapping his hands/knuckles on the body of the cello.

Interesting performance, indeed!

Cheers,

Joe

Last edited by jcfelice88keys (26-09-2017 02:10)

28

Re: .fxp wanted

What a great demo, Joe - thankyou! I really like the way you presented it.  There are some clicks in the audio, and at first, I assumed the clicks occurred every time the sound was switched between sources, and I was rather confused - at times thinking "Wow, they are IDENTICAL". But alas, this is not the case at all. ;^)

One thing that does stand out that causes a difference is that Pianoteq has more reverb than the real recording, which makes the overall sound more distant. Perhaps if the reverb were reduced (or the room simulation made smaller?) it would help.

Greg.

29

Re: .fxp wanted

skip wrote:

What a great demo, Joe - thankyou! I really like the way you presented it.  There are some clicks in the audio, and at first, I assumed the clicks occurred every time the sound was switched between sources, and I was rather confused - at times thinking "Wow, they are IDENTICAL". But alas, this is not the case at all. ;^)

One thing that does stand out that causes a difference is that Pianoteq has more reverb than the real recording, which makes the overall sound more distant. Perhaps if the reverb were reduced (or the room simulation made smaller?) it would help.

Greg.


Yes, the default reverb in the original Pianoteq preset does create a very different impression. Thanks for the exercise in recreating the unisons, however.

Last edited by Jake Johnson (26-09-2017 02:32)

30

Re: .fxp wanted

Hello Skip,

Regarding the reverb on my recording, of course you are correct; within the span of about an hour, I picked out a Steinway B preset (Recording #2) which happens to be more distant sounding than the live-recorded Model M.  I made no special efforts to minimize pops and clicks between takes, so what you hear is what actually happened during my activity.

As was explained in my original post, there was no pretense of showing that Pianoteq 6 is identical to a digitally recorded analog piano.  However, the similarities between analog source and the modeled piano ... are amazing.

Thank you for chiming in.

Cheers,

Joe


P.S.  I do not intend on publishing my .fxp of the expanded unisons because this was one example of one tuning scheme of one piano.  On other days, other unisons will be out of tune on the same piano.

Last edited by jcfelice88keys (26-09-2017 02:36)

31

Re: .fxp wanted

BrooklynDuo wrote:

Hi all! Jake Johnson reached out to us and I figured I'd jump in to say hi and give a little clarity on our setup.

The piano is indeed a Steinway B grand. And, although it looks quite old, it's actually a 2007. It's a limited edition Henry Ziegler Steinway Model B they did for his birthday. Marnie much preferred the feel and action of the newer Steinway pianos and after trying dozens of model Bs, she was immediately drawn to this one. We're really happy with the sound of it, but as with most Steinways, it's a bit of a dark piano. With our music, that's not as ideal, so we have to do a little work to brighten up the piano and thin it out a tad to fit it into the mix. That's not as big of a problem with the solo piano stuff though (Moonlight, Intermezzo, etc.).

With regard to our tracking and mixing setup, we take a much more modern approach. We're placing the mics much closer than your typical classical recordist. In Intermezzo, we're using a pair of AKG 451s. I can't remember if we had room mics in that one, but I don't think so. Since that video, we've upgraded to a matched pair of Peluso P12 tube mics, which I LOVE on piano. They allow me a lot more flexibility with EQ too, as they seem to capture more data than the 451s. This is the setup on the Moonlight recording and I think I have the 451s as room mics on that one.

We're using Millennia pres on the piano too, and Vintech for the room. Apogee Symphony for AD/DA. Also, I should mention that the room is pretty well treated, despite most of the treatment is not seen in the videos (there are about 30 bass traps in that room and some diffusion).

Jake asked about compression too - I use compression fairly liberally on all of our pop stuff and some on the classical stuff. And I mess a lot with EQ to brighten the piano in all of our recordings and sometimes dip out some bothersome frequencies in some of the tunes.

Anyway, hope that helps. And thanks for sharing our videos!

Patrick

Thanks for signing up and sharing this information, Patrick. Seems that you have a very serious set-up, and the sound you can get reflects that. I was very surprised to learn that the piano is relatively recent. I love its older look, with the old label and the old candle holders, if those round extrusions are candle holders. I'll have to do some research to see if this Henry Ziegler limited edition has other specs that differ from a standard Steinway B.

And I want to investigate both of those sets of mics, as I'm sure other people here will. The ones on the Intermezzo recording capture the tenor and midrange particularly well.

Last edited by Jake Johnson (26-09-2017 14:50)

32

Re: .fxp wanted

scherbakov.al wrote:

Comparison little of a piece with Pianoteq with similar microphone settings ..
http://www.forum-pianoteq.com/uploads.p … econds.mp3
the sound on the pedal at the end produces a little synthesis .

I think there's too much stereo separation to be realistic. I took that mp3 and edited it a bit: https://puu.sh/xJzL6/eecd011b7e.wav

Reduced stereo width to 70% and panned left 35%. I also gave it more treble with EQ: https://puu.sh/xJzFO/903034be7a.png (actually that's bad equalizing practice, better practice would be to reduce bass instead of increasing everything else). Done with Reaper. Just wanted to show how big difference the most basic audio editing can make. If you use Pianoteq through a DAW like Reaper you can apply all kinds of edits in real time.

33

Re: .fxp wanted

skinkken wrote:
scherbakov.al wrote:

Comparison little of a piece with Pianoteq with similar microphone settings ..
http://www.forum-pianoteq.com/uploads.p … econds.mp3
the sound on the pedal at the end produces a little synthesis .

I think there's too much stereo separation to be realistic. I took that mp3 and edited it a bit: https://puu.sh/xJzL6/eecd011b7e.wav

Reduced stereo width to 70% and panned left 35%. I also gave it more treble with EQ: https://puu.sh/xJzFO/903034be7a.png (actually that's bad equalizing practice, better practice would be to reduce bass instead of increasing everything else). Done with Reaper. Just wanted to show how big difference the most basic audio editing can make. If you use Pianoteq through a DAW like Reaper you can apply all kinds of edits in real time.


That's lovely. Seriously lovely. Nice edit of an already very good fxp. You panned it in Reaper?

EDIT: If you created a preset for the ReaEQ settings, do you mind sharing it?

Last edited by Jake Johnson (26-09-2017 22:29)

34

Re: .fxp wanted

Olivier_Frappier wrote:

Pianoteq 6 sounds very good.

However, i search this kind of sound (old Steinway):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wj1xQUUJ94U

for sure, a .fxp for Pianoteq 6 could achieve this goal.

smile


Olivier--Did you see that this piano turned out to be a relatively recent piano? Remarkable sound and appearance.