1

Topic: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

Hey, guys.

Is anybody following this ongoing discussion of Pianoteq 6 there? Here is the link: http://forum.pianoworld.com/ubbthreads. … teq-6.html
I thought paying attention to critique provided there may benefit Modart and all of us, in the future. May be we should select some of those complaints and feedback and mention them all here? Feel free to reference any post you perceive  as important.

Here are some from me:
http://forum.pianoworld.com/ubbthreads. … ost2676916
http://forum.pianoworld.com/ubbthreads. … ost2676761
http://forum.pianoworld.com/ubbthreads. … ost2676284
http://forum.pianoworld.com/ubbthreads. … ost2673400

This post seems very important to me: http://forum.pianoworld.com/ubbthreads. … ost2676723 - as well as guy's named "karvala" answer to it: http://forum.pianoworld.com/ubbthreads. … ost2676755

The karvala guy also provided a lot of detailed feedback about what he doesn't like in Ptq6, and in Ptq in general. Here are his other posts:
http://forum.pianoworld.com/ubbthreads. … ost2673317
http://forum.pianoworld.com/ubbthreads. … ost2676158

The other guy with detailed feedback is CyberGene. He claims he was a beta-tester for Ptq in the past (long ago), so it may be valuable:
http://forum.pianoworld.com/ubbthreads. … ost2673204
http://forum.pianoworld.com/ubbthreads. … ost2676112

The guy MacMacMac is also seem to be disgrunted:
http://forum.pianoworld.com/ubbthreads. … ost2673328

In general, all negative critique may be summarized like this: "Pianoteq is unchallenged when it comes to playability and feel/response, but in terms of tone and authenticity it still leaves a lot to be desired, often sounding synthetic, though he definitely gets better and closer, with each release"

Last edited by AlexS (22-09-2017 21:18)

2

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

Thanks for the links, it's interesting to hear some more perspectives.

I would love Modartt to release a more detailed statement about what precisely the criteria were for Steinway to agree to a licensing agreement.  My impression from the little I read is that Steinway - and this befits the attitude of an established brand - was unwilling to give it's name to something it felt would under-represent the quality of their product.  But perhaps I'm incorrect.  I'd definitely be interested to hear more on this front, but I don't think that Steinway held out because they weren't getting enough money but because the tech was still not up to par.  Again, I could be wrong.

But in regards to some of the other comments - that there was barely an improvement on the sound - well, that's just bullocks to my ears.  I don't think PT will be complete until around PT 10, even still, but this model did not sound synthesized to my ears when I first plugged it in like all the others.  I haven't spent hours and hours with it yet, so maybe there is some mid-register synthetics I will find along the way, but my initial impression was that the improvement was significant and it was the only time I'd ever plugged-and-played PT and wasn't being distracted by it's synthetic sound.  I think it's likely I don't have as good a set of ears as some people in this world, so I'd imagine there are some degrees of improvement over my own sensibilities.  Additionally, there are some features I think which are lacking, and some of which DO make the piano less realistic in some contexts:

I can't say this enough - if I position a microphone directly over the keyboard, I should be hearing the wood of the keys hitting the body of the case...and this oversight is so basic, IMO, that it is un-befitting a "mature software"   I tested 6 last night for this and it's still a NO GO, unless I'm missing something.  To me this is a design bug, and I don't get why it doesn't seem to be recognized as such.

3

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

I followed and participated in the discussion of Pianoteq 6 at the PianoWorld forums when the release was first announced, until it became somewhat frustrating. Perhaps it is appropriate to give some attention to such discussions, without participating too much. With rather vague complaints such as "it sounds synthetic," "I can hear the Pianoteq signature," "the bass is boxy," "the treble isn't sparkling enough," "there's something not quite right," etc., it's hard to determine if they have a valid criticism or are motivated to do so for some other reason. smile

Last edited by Stephen_Doonan (23-09-2017 11:25)

4

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

jconl wrote:

But in regards to some of the other comments - that there was barely an improvement on the sound - well, that's just bullocks to my ears.

I also felt like it's become much more convincing in Ptq6, but I don't trust my ears much smile Don't have any kind of acute musical hearing at all. I'm not that much experienced with sound of truly good acoustic pianos as well (except for sample libraries). So I thought critique from more experienced users may seem more helpful to Modart.

Last edited by AlexS (22-09-2017 17:48)

5

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

jconl wrote:

I can't say this enough - if I position a microphone directly over the keyboard, I should be hearing the wood of the keys hitting the body of the case

You mean the key-release noise? If you don't think it's loud enough, just increase its volume in the Action pane of Pianoteq's main user-interface window.

6

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

I agree, AlexS, that any feedback is likely good.  I was also a bit skeptical when one of the more experienced SOUNDING users was complaining that adjusting the hammer hardness would cause deficiencies in either the lower or higher register because the adjustment was uniform.  Well, as an owner of Pro I know for a fact that it does not need to be uniform, and that that user could - if he owned Pro - just adjust the hardness on every key until he had a sound that more expressed his own idea.  So for all of the appearance of his "expertise" the entire criticism falls flat because he hasn't even utilized the full potential of the software to attempt to achieve his desired sound first.

I have things that don't jive with me, too - I think PT's reverb has always been abysmal, so much so that to me, in a sense, PT STILL sounds synthetic to me purely out of the box because the reverb is just THAT unbelievable.  So I always turn it off - first thing.  If I came on here and claimed PT sounded synthetic but didn't turn off the reverb the critique would in one sense be valid, but in another sense it would be incorrect and even untrue to me.

I don't necessarily think that "expert ears" are always offering the best advice, either, because experts can often lose the forest for the trees among other things.  But, if there WERE an ideal expert, to me it would be a lifelong piano-tuner out there with acoustic measuring devices that owns PT Pro 6, a modern Steinway D, and utilizes all of PT Pro's intricacies to create the most realistic sound he/or she can with it, then use all of his/her superhero devices to measure the differentiation, and THEN give his/her opinion with the data to back it up.  Now THAT"s an opinion I would certainly like to hear.

Anyone out there?

7

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

No, Stephen_Doonan, I mean the key-ONSET noise - the setting that doesn't (yet) exist.  In real life the key doesn't make noise ONLY when I release it, it actually makes more noise when I first hit it, but is typically covered by the tone of the piano.  However, if I bring the mic right up to the face of the keyboard I should hear the percussive sound of the keys hitting the case WHEN I HIT THE KEY, not only when I release it.

This is why it's so astounding to me that here we are in version 6 and this basic fact has never been considered, apparently.  It's like basic physics and so obvious, and yet entirely absent.

8

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

For close micing the Pianoteq is parsecs away from the real one, obviously, sorry. The sound of the dampers make while contacting the strings, when they go up, when they go down, it is impossible to emulate with samples, it depends from the actual release speed of the keys, not just the "velocity" data. When you push the sustain gently, when you push it hard, when you release it fast, slowly - the sound dampers make, from gentle noises to thunder-like release sounds - it is so much left to emulate at this stage. Also that sound the hammers make, the sound of felts contacting the strings, that tiny 'hiss' sound... I don't actually expect it to be modelled any time soon, but I hope to see some more steps towards.

...I mean just hit the bass string hard and then release the key very slowly - you'll get that clear rumbling sound from the string vibrating against the damper, nobody able to emulate it yet.

...and it is actually impossible to emulate what I described with the usual MIDI keyboard - you need continuous monitoring of the key position as opposite to just the velocity numbers. Same goes to the sustain pedal.

Last edited by AKM (22-09-2017 18:27)
Andrei Kuznetsov

9

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

What this amounts to, for me, is that the mic-ing is just flat un-realistic.  They are not taking into consideration the physical presence of the instrument.  But in real-life instruments have physical bodies, so in virtual-life one would think they should have virtual physical bodies that exhibit the same behavior.

I also wrote earlier, but it is worth writing again, that I think that when two notes are loudly played as a trill that there is a physically heightened interaction between those strings that creates subtly chaotic events to the pitch, and that this is often obvious in real life and acoustic recordings.  I'm not sure if PT6 accounts for how the proximity of notes could affect their physical "ringing" due to the strings being close.  I haven't tested it yet, maybe today.  But again, this is an example of how real physical reality creates complexity where PT may not be considering it.

10

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

I'll try that today, AKM, but I won't be entirely surprised when the experience comes off as completely inauthentic.

I actually do expect it to be modeled soon, I mean if I was all of a sudden going to make a change-of-career into physically modeled pianos, the first thing I would do is wipe my floor with Modartt by taking into account all of the idiosyncrasies they are over-looking.  All of these small things make a difference in the gestalt - the devil is in the details.  Maybe they're lazy because they have no competition, but all it takes is one college grad who wants to kick ass to come along and remind them - by threatening their livelihoods with the onset of apparently much needed competition - that they are effing it up by not paying attention to the basics.

BTW I DO think PT6 is a huge improvement in the core sound, but this discussion is re-awakening in me the exasperation of supposed experts in their field just not being on top of the ball in the basics of their craft, or being unaware of things that are obvious to even children.  If you're emulating an instrument, I don't know, make a list of all of the things that there could possibly be to emulate to make it as authentic as possible, and then do it.

Maybe they do have a list, but some of this seems REALLY basic for people who likely make this their life's work.

Last edited by jconl (22-09-2017 18:36)

11

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

jconl wrote:

Maybe they're lazy because they have no competition, but all it takes is one college grad who wants to kick ass to come along and remind them - by threatening their livelihoods with the onset of apparently much needed competition - that they are effing it up by not paying attention to the basics.

There is TruePianos at least, but it sounded too horrible even to my ears. At least free demos I had access to.

Last edited by AlexS (22-09-2017 18:41)

12

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

TruePianos doesn't strike me as real competition, I had a similar response to it.  By competition I mean a peer, not just someone in the same genre of virtualization.  Good call, though, I haven't looked at TruePianos for a while now, it was interesting to check it out again.

13

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

Wow, AKM.  Spot on.  When I slowly release a bass note it just shuts off.

That being said, is this something PT can even do with current MIDI controller tech?  My keyboard sends a velocity and an on/off signal to the computer, I don't think there is any recognition in the instrument that there is a gradation as to how fast/slow I release a note.

I think I would both need a keyboard that can genuinely communicate the speed at which the key is depressed/released and then PT would have to recognize that signal and interpret it into a corresponding sonic event, no?

14

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

jconl wrote:

No, Stephen_Doonan, I mean the key-ONSET noise.

Then adjust the volume of the Hammer Noise in the Voicing panel of Pianoteq's main user-interface window. Make it as loud as you prefer. In addition, you can right-click the slider control and choose "Humanize," to make the hammer noise randomly variable for each key press on the MIDI keyboard.

15

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

This actually puts a disappointing spin on this whole project for me, AKM.  Not that it won't be accomplished, but that we're still far away from completion.  Maybe I'm starting to agree with that fellow that said that PT will go to version 25 before we see the glimpses of the true emulation.  And not necessarily because they can't do it sooner, but because in some cases the hardware may be inadequate, and I'm not entirely convinced that hardware manufacturers would see market value in the degree of attention-to-detail I'm desiring from this project.  It would take a pioneer, not a bloated conglomerate stagnated in their own normalcies.

I honestly don't get it in the end, though.  What, is there a lack of passion in the community or something?  Does midi have too many shortcomings as a format?  Again, we're talking basic stuff here, things any intelligent 7-10 year old could point out, and here we are in 2017 and there's apparently either no care, no cognizance, or some sort of resistance I'm unaware of that makes it so that virtual instrument makers don't address the fact that when a person hits a key they can hit it at different speeds and - if we're REALLY going for realism here - than why not receive and interpret that information?

Or am I missing something?

16

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

Stephen_Doonan, you're not getting it.  (caps meant as italics, not yelling)  It's NOT the HAMMER NOISE, it's the NOISE OF THE KEY HITTING THE CASE.  These are NOT the same sounds.  It is NO OTHER NOISE - it's the sound of the physical key hitting the physical case when I put the mic up to the keys.  It's THAT simple.

Of course I adjusted the hammer noise, that's nearly the first thing I did, right after I went to the release that you initially mentioned.  I'm pretty sure I've been through every option in PT and it doesn't exist, and your suggestion doesn't make sense in relation to what I'm actually looking for.  A real piano makes both the hammer noise and the sound of the key hitting the case, period - no excuses, no rationalizations, no workarounds - that's how a real piano works. 

I feel like I'm saying something terribly obvious and simple here.

Last edited by jconl (22-09-2017 20:37)

17

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

And, yes, I can certainly create a workaround.  I can find samples of keys without tones and then sprinkle them throughout by triggering their samples until I get the desired effect.  So it's not a fatal flaw.

What AKM mentioned - now THAT is a fatal flaw.  I actually think there could be room for workarounds there, but not in a manner that could be played live currently - a pretty heavy and unacceptable loss of value, IMO.

Last edited by jconl (22-09-2017 20:37)

18

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

I also noted how a lot of people admit that YC5 piano, which hasn't been that much popular till Ptq6, now is at least at the same level as Grotrian or Model B. Some of them, including those who provide negative feedback at Pianoworld, mention that they think about it as most "overall rounded up" instrument. So whatever Modart did to it, they probably should consider to do it to other instruments as well, if it's not yet done.

Last edited by AlexS (22-09-2017 21:15)

19

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

jconl wrote:

I was also a bit skeptical when one of the more experienced SOUNDING users was complaining that adjusting the hammer hardness would cause deficiencies in either the lower or higher register because the adjustment was uniform.  Well, as an owner of Pro I know for a fact that it does not need to be uniform, and that that user could - if he owned Pro - just adjust the hardness on every key until he had a sound that more expressed his own idea.  So for all of the appearance of his "expertise" the entire criticism falls flat because he hasn't even utilized the full potential of the software to attempt to achieve his desired sound first.

Yes, it can be done in Pro (afaicr, I read it in some manual), but not in Standard version. And I believe Pro is not that widespread version of Ptq, as it's a bit costy.. I also may mistaken, but there is no way to test Pro version for yourself, even illegal way (like, I don't think I've ever seen it on any of the torrent sites out there). So this his mistake may be understandable.

jconl wrote:

I have things that don't jive with me, too - I think PT's reverb has always been abysmal, so much so that to me, in a sense, PT STILL sounds synthetic to me purely out of the box because the reverb is just THAT unbelievable.  So I always turn it off - first thing.  If I came on here and claimed PT sounded synthetic but didn't turn off the reverb the critique would in one sense be valid, but in another sense it would be incorrect and even untrue to me.

I find its (or any other VST piano's) sound too "uninteresting/dull" without reverb, unfortunately, so I just must use it. Or do you mean you use some external reverb plugin? Which one?

jconl wrote:

I don't necessarily think that "expert ears" are always offering the best advice, either, because experts can often lose the forest for the trees among other things.  But, if there WERE an ideal expert, to me it would be a lifelong piano-tuner out there with acoustic measuring devices that owns PT Pro 6, a modern Steinway D, and utilizes all of PT Pro's intricacies to create the most realistic sound he/or she can with it, then use all of his/her superhero devices to measure the differentiation, and THEN give his/her opinion with the data to back it up.  Now THAT"s an opinion I would certainly like to hear.
Anyone out there?

During my previous visits to this forum, I believe there was at least one such guy, though can't remember his name atm smile

Last edited by AlexS (22-09-2017 21:32)

20

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

AKM wrote:

...and it is actually impossible to emulate what I described with the usual MIDI keyboard - you need continuous monitoring of the key position as opposite to just the velocity numbers. Same goes to the sustain pedal.

Afaicr, you don't control hammer with key all the way down, at the end of it there is this moment when it flies ahead completely detached from the key, and you can't stop or slow down it after that. So I suppose at this moment speed it's accumulated is all you need to know to simulate what will happen, isn't it?

Here is an video on subject:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIUXBhw-7Wo

21

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

Yes about the reverb, AlexS - if I use anything I use external verb.  I don't have Altiverb yet, but my intention has been to either pair PT with Altiverb or Vienna Instruments MIR.

For the time being I'm using the free Bricasti M7 convolution verb located here:

http://www.samplicity.com/bricasti-m7-i … responses/

I use cubase which has REvelation, which is capable of importing convolution reverbs, so that is the free solution I'm using for the time being.  Depending on the DAW you're using you may also be able to import that and play around with it a bit, see if you like it.  There may also be a free convolution plugin out there I am unaware of.  I've also heard good things about Valhalla, which less expensive than the two mentioned above, but haven't investigated it that much as I'm into classical and feel a convolution would be the best pairing, especially if I'm using a modeled instrument.

Since my intention is studio-recording quality vs live performance I probably could even work around the criticism AKM mentioned by adjusting the damper settings manually in the affected sections.  In theory you could also work around it in live situations if you created some uber-complex set up with different versions of PT triggered by some means.

Really, PT could avoid a great deal of criticism even there (and even without hardware improvements) by relating the damper behavior to the detected speed (bpm) the player is playing at.  Slow key releases happen more often in slower playing, and the damper release, as AKM put it, is effected by this.  I think they MAY adjust for this if I remember correctly in the key release noise(?) in some manner, but I don't hear any adjustments on the damper.  If I play a set of really slow notes on the Steinway D it doesn't sound like the damper is releasing more slowly than if I play a fast passage. 


So, if they went about detecting the bpm of the player and adjusting the behavior of the damper as it relates to the bpm the player is playing at they could avoid - in part - being faced with the criticism that their dampers do not behave realistically, which they apparently do not.

22

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

Thank you very much for your comments! Here are a few points that may address your concerns:

  • sustain woosh (dampers gently brushing the strings): it is now modelled (up and down) in Pianoteq for all modern grands. Raise the Sustain pedal noise level in the Action panel, and listen to how the woosh varies when moving the sustain pedal down ad up more or less rapidly with a progressive pedal,

  • dampers noise: also modelled, raise the Damper noise in the Note Edit section (Pro version only), and listen to what happens in the bass range when releasing notes from staccato to very slowly. If your keyboard is not equipped with varying Note Off velocity, you can still test it by changing the Note Off velocity in the velocity panel. Listen also to what happens when you change the damper duration in the Action panel,

  • action noises (mainly escapement going back to rest position): they are a mix of sampling and modelling. Here too, raise the Key release noise in the action panel, and listen to what happens when you change the Note Off velocity,

  • notes hitting the "case" (in fact the key bed): on an acoustic piano, because of the thick felt under the keys, there is no noise unless you play fortissimo. This noise is modeled in Pianoteq, listen to the low freq rumble on fortissimo.

We know that not many keyboards are equipped with Note Off velocity, but even for those keyboards, Pianoteq "guesses" a release velocity based on the Note On duration, that you can hear and experiment by either listening loud or raising the related noise levels (as in the default settings, we did not want those noises to be too present, after all they are all noises that the piano manufacturers have been always fighting against).

23

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

jconl wrote:

That being said, is this something PT can even do with current MIDI controller tech?  My keyboard sends a velocity and an on/off signal to the computer, I don't think there is any recognition in the instrument that there is a gradation as to how fast/slow I release a note.

MIDI controllers that send release velocity DO exist.

Hard work and guts!

24

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

Thank you for your response, Philippe Guillaume!

It's nice to hear these things are being addressed to!  I would guess, then, that my keyboard does not have off-note velocity because the effect of the damper release being longer DOES happen when I adjust the note-off panel.  Thank you for pointing that out.  Do you know of a list online of note-off enabled controllers/keyboards?

Thank you as well for pointing out the key-onset noise.  I do hear what you're talking about - however the volume of the key-hit sound does not appear to be effected by moving the mic away from the keys of the keyboard, it sounds to me like it's basically just as loud if I mic from the ceiling as it does when I mic it close.  If I have the mic on the keys, I should REALLY be hearing that felty boom then, no?  Either way, it would be nice to be given the ability to adjust how loud and soft that sound is.  Is there currently a way to?

25

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

EvilDragon wrote:
jconl wrote:

That being said, is this something PT can even do with current MIDI controller tech?  My keyboard sends a velocity and an on/off signal to the computer, I don't think there is any recognition in the instrument that there is a gradation as to how fast/slow I release a note.

MIDI controllers that send release velocity DO exist.

Yes, and they make a difference to my ears, adding to the realism.

26

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

Check the MIDI implementation chart for the controller in question, if it exists. For example, Roland RD-2000 (and the cheaper FP-90 with exactly the same keybed) does have release velocity. Kurzweil gear usually also does, as well. Some Korgs, too (not all of them). Not sure about Nord and Yammie.

Last edited by EvilDragon (22-09-2017 22:10)
Hard work and guts!

27

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

jconl wrote:

Stephen_Doonan, you're not getting it.  (caps meant as italics, not yelling)  It's NOT the HAMMER NOISE, it's the NOISE OF THE KEY HITTING THE CASE.  These are NOT the same sounds.  It is NO OTHER NOISE - it's the sound of the physical key hitting the physical case

You mean the sound of the key hitting a felt rail in the key bed? I didn't realize that sound was so prominent, as dampened as it would be, or desirable.

Last edited by Stephen_Doonan (22-09-2017 22:17)

28

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

EvilDragon wrote:

MIDI controllers that send release velocity DO exist.

The Kawai VPC1 is evidently one of those particular MIDI controllers, not that I use the feature or care much about it, at least at the moment. smile

Last edited by Stephen_Doonan (22-09-2017 22:15)

29

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

Stephen_Doonan Yes.  I do find it desirable, although I can understand that it may not often be found desirable.  I sometimes like close mic-ing precisely because it adds to the articulation, and I consider that a part of the articulation.

30

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

EvilDragon wrote:
jconl wrote:

That being said, is this something PT can even do with current MIDI controller tech?  My keyboard sends a velocity and an on/off signal to the computer, I don't think there is any recognition in the instrument that there is a gradation as to how fast/slow I release a note.

MIDI controllers that send release velocity DO exist.

Just out of curiosity: what price range do those belong to? Any DP you can point out, in particular? Though I have a hunch it's not something I can afford ))

Last edited by AlexS (22-09-2017 22:13)

31

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

AlexS wrote:
AKM wrote:

...and it is actually impossible to emulate what I described with the usual MIDI keyboard - you need continuous monitoring of the key position as opposite to just the velocity numbers. Same goes to the sustain pedal.

Afaicr, you don't control hammer with key all the way down, at the end of it there is this moment when it flies ahead completely detached from the key, and you can't stop or slow down it after that. So I suppose at this moment speed it's accumulated is all you need to know to simulate what will happen, isn't it?

Here is an video on subject:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIUXBhw-7Wo

I was talking more about the damper behavior than about the hammer.

Andrei Kuznetsov

32

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

jconl wrote:

Stephen_Doonan Yes.  I do find it desirable, although I can understand that it may not often be found desirable.  I sometimes like close mic-ing precisely because it adds to the articulation, and I consider that a part of the articulation.

I would probably just harden the hammers (allow them to age without using a felt pick to freshen and soften them) on an acoustic piano, or use Pianoteq's easy hammer hardness adjustment sliders for "piano," "mezzo" and "forte" key touch, if I wished to have a more distinct, percussive attack. But that's just a personal preference.

Last edited by Stephen_Doonan (22-09-2017 22:18)

33

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

Stephen_Doonan, EvilDragon and Jake Johnson thank you for the suggestions.  I had absolutely no idea this was available. 

I think I should be able to get by with what I have now that I know I can make these adjustments, it'll just be a matter of working it out in the DAW I suppose, and once I can get a new keyboard I'll probably sprint immediately to the Roland, as I've had really good experiences with their digital pianos in the past.

I'm glad I brought this up, an I'm happy to see I was mistaken!

smile

34

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

AlexS wrote:
EvilDragon wrote:
jconl wrote:

That being said, is this something PT can even do with current MIDI controller tech?  My keyboard sends a velocity and an on/off signal to the computer, I don't think there is any recognition in the instrument that there is a gradation as to how fast/slow I release a note.

MIDI controllers that send release velocity DO exist.

Just out of curiosity: what price range do those belong to? Any DP you can point out, in particular? Though I have a hunch it's not something I can afford ))

RD-2000 is 2600€ at Thomann. FP-90 is 1700€.

On the lower end, Casio PX5-S also seems to have release velocity. That one is 780€.

Last edited by EvilDragon (22-09-2017 22:28)
Hard work and guts!

35

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

Thanks for referencing the Casio, EvilDragon - that fits in with my budget in the immediate moment.

36

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

The Lachnit keyboards also provide dynamic key release velocity.

37

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

jconl wrote:

Thanks for referencing the Casio, EvilDragon - that fits in with my budget in the immediate moment.

Try it first to see if you like the keybed. It's pretty good, but definitely not at Roland level.

TimN wrote:

The Lachnit keyboards also provide dynamic key release velocity.

At their price, if they didn't, that would be idiotic beyond reckoning.

Hard work and guts!

38

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

Thank you very much for the reply, Philippe!

Philippe Guillaume wrote:

sustain woosh (dampers gently brushing the strings): it is now modelled (up and down) in Pianoteq for all modern grands. Raise the Sustain pedal noise level in the Action panel, and listen to how the woosh varies when moving the sustain pedal down ad up more or less rapidly with a progressive pedal

- I don't have a continuous sustain pedal, but I just assigned it to a MIDI controller slider to check it. C'mon, with all my respect, the implementation is just plain terrible, totally not how it works in real life. Say, in PT (Grotrian) you can move slowly the pedal, and it will make this 'sound' louder and louder gradually all the way (?!). Than after you stop after, say, 2/3 of it's way for a few seconds you push more to the end, and again in make the 'sound' from this position. C'mon, this is not how it works at all. And what about a thunder-like noise when you abruptly throw-release the dampers onto the strings? I mean it is how it should work.

Please understand that I respect your job a lot, this is just some "constructive criticism" smile

dampers noise: also modelled, raise the Damper noise in the Note Edit section (Pro version only), and listen to what happens in the bass range when releasing notes from staccato to very slowly. If your keyboard is not equipped with varying Note Off velocity, you can still test it by changing the Note Off velocity in the velocity panel. Listen also to what happens when you change the damper duration in the Action panel,

- I will be able to check it carefully tomorrow, unfortunately my keyboard don't have the note-off velocity, maybe I'll find some workaround in some sequencer software.

Last edited by AKM (22-09-2017 23:01)
Andrei Kuznetsov

39

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

Note on/off velocity is quite enough to emulate the hammer behavior and mechanical release noises. In real ones the hammer also receives some sort of "velocity information". Unfortunately to emulate the dampers behavior on/off velocity is not enough (to my understanding).

Andrei Kuznetsov

40

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

AKM wrote:

Unfortunately to emulate the dampers behavior on/off velocity is not enough (to my understanding).

Yep, which is why a continuous damper pedal should be used, naturally.

Hard work and guts!

41

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

I really don't see how in foreseeable future close micing can be emulated. It is about how the felts touches the string especially at ppp. Dampers too. You hear this quiet cloth touch in real ones. Distant micing is another story.

Andrei Kuznetsov

42

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

I'm feeling quite happy about this now.  I think P6 is a great leap forward in sound quality, as I've said elsewhere.  Now that I know about some of these nuances I feel confident I made the right decision to go Pro a few years back.

I like the keyboard I have right now - suppose I don't purchase a velocity-release sensitive keyboard, am I correct in that I could likely achieve the same degree of realism in the DAW after the fact by manually automating the Note-Off velocity?

43

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

I would say manual tweaking of note off velocities (more like "guessing" which values should be where depending on how you played it during recording) would never yield good enough results... or it would take too much time to get it right.


Better have a worthy MIDI controller instead. Saves time, if not money. tongue


AKM wrote:

I really don't see how in foreseeable future close micing can be emulated. It is about how the felts touches the string especially at ppp. Dampers too. You hear this quiet cloth touch in real ones.

It is not impossible at all. There are various methods that can be employed here, and I'm sure Pianoteq is already using them (sound energy dispersion model, soundwave tracing etc.), - what remains is refining the model further.

Last edited by EvilDragon (22-09-2017 23:13)
Hard work and guts!

44

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

Damn you, EvilDragon!  I know you're right but now that means I need to do stuff!

sad

45

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

jconl wrote:

Thanks for referencing the Casio, EvilDragon - that fits in with my budget in the immediate moment.

Casio is a great bang-for-the-buck DP maker. I use a Privia 850 that I bought new a couple years ago for $750 CDN (rare bargain price - from Costco). It not only records release velocity (no big deal for me - yet, at least), its built in sustain pedal sends continuous data, so the "half pedal" responsiveness of all Pianoteq's models (and some sample-based VSTs) really shines.

Syd

46

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

S_G_B wrote:
jconl wrote:

Thanks for referencing the Casio, EvilDragon - that fits in with my budget in the immediate moment.

Casio is a great bang-for-the-buck DP maker. I use a Privia 850 that I bought new a couple years ago for $750 CDN (rare bargain price - from Costco). It not only records release velocity (no big deal for me - yet, at least), its built in sustain pedal sends continuous data, so the "half pedal" responsiveness of all Pianoteq's models (and some sample-based VSTs) really shines.

Syd

Yeah, I have a Casio Privia 160.  I love it, the feel is great.  Doesn't appear to have release velocity, but agreed - the pedal is fantastic.

47

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

When I was purchasing I wasn't aware of release velocity, only after-touch, which I wasn't interested in at the time.

48

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

jconl wrote:
S_G_B wrote:
jconl wrote:

Thanks for referencing the Casio, EvilDragon - that fits in with my budget in the immediate moment.

Casio is a great bang-for-the-buck DP maker. I use a Privia 850 that I bought new a couple years ago for $750 CDN (rare bargain price - from Costco). It not only records release velocity (no big deal for me - yet, at least), its built in sustain pedal sends continuous data, so the "half pedal" responsiveness of all Pianoteq's models (and some sample-based VSTs) really shines.

Syd

Yeah, I have a Casio Privia 160.  I love it, the feel is great.  Doesn't appear to have release velocity, but agreed - the pedal is fantastic.

I'm fairly sure that on PX-160 they don't sport continuous pedal... I posses of a bit older rig of around the same price range, and it's the same for mine, I remember the fact from doing some research before. On budget PX pianos it only has 3 states, pressed, released, and one middle-step to make transition a bit smoother. Not even remotely continuous, though. I even doubt it's truly continuous at PX-850 mentioned above, isn't it like just 8-16 states for those? Still better than 3, of course.

49

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

Lol.  Sorry, I have the PX-150 and, yes, I like the pedaling but, no, now that I look at it it does not appear to be continuous.

I need to get a new setup :S

50

Re: Pianoteq 6 discussion at Pianoworld

AlexS wrote:
jconl wrote:
S_G_B wrote:

Casio is a great bang-for-the-buck DP maker. I use a Privia 850 that I bought new a couple years ago for $750 CDN (rare bargain price - from Costco). It not only records release velocity (no big deal for me - yet, at least), its built in sustain pedal sends continuous data, so the "half pedal" responsiveness of all Pianoteq's models (and some sample-based VSTs) really shines.

Syd

Yeah, I have a Casio Privia 160.  I love it, the feel is great.  Doesn't appear to have release velocity, but agreed - the pedal is fantastic.

I'm fairly sure that on PX-160 they don't sport continuous pedal... I posses of a bit older rig of around the same price range, and it's the same for mine, I remember the fact from doing some research before. On budget PX pianos it only has 3 states, pressed, released, and one middle-step to make transition a bit smoother. Not even remotely continuous, though. I even doubt it's truly continuous at PX-850 mentioned above, isn't it like just 8-16 states for those? Still better than 3, of course.

During calibration, Pianoteq itself recognizes the PX-850's pedal as a continuous one. But given the limited range of pedal motion (and foot control), it's hard to reliably produce more than a few audibly discernible shades of sustain - at least it is for me. Still, it's a whole dimension of nuance beyond the typical on-off response.

Syd