• Register
  • Help
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 24

Topic: pianoteq's new update

  1. #1

    pianoteq's new update

    I played with the demo for just a few minutes last night. It is certainly tantalizing. I still can't help feeling a little frustrated though... it feels *so* much more musically playable than any sample set I've played. And yet... shoot... it still just doesn't say "wood and metal" in the way that a good sample set does when you hear it. I did notice that the virtual microphones make a pretty big difference. For instance, there's a C3 for playing, and a C3 for recording. The recording preset uses the mics and, at the expense of some ambience (I like very dry, very close pianos), the subtle "synthetic buzz" quality is notably reduced and you can actually start to imagine an actual physical instrument.

    Anyone who had objections to the prior versions of pianoteq played with this one yet? Any impressions?


  2. #2

    Re: pianoteq's new update

    I tried the previous version's demo and didn't like it.

    Tried this new version and bought it after half an hour.

  3. #3

    Re: pianoteq's new update

    I'm a supporter of their idea, but didn't like the previous versions. I downloaded the new one, played around for an hour or so. I think there's been improvements.. I just don't think they're going after the same sound I'm going after. I just want a clean sound for jazz. Pianoteq's sounds been, and still is very mellow. I especially can't stand their long cut off that makes it sound like the piano's in a room even if you cut reverb off.

    I think the main difference with v3 is the mic placement thingy. The rest more or less sounds the same to me. I mean, maybe there are technical differences, but in effect, it still pretty much sounds synthetic like v2. I like the low to mid range, but the right hand c4 c5 area is a dead giveaway, it almost sounds like a cp80 in that zone.

    I've already messed with v2 demo quite a lot, and can say that it's really not the combination of settings. I mean, the pianoteq forum users haven't come up with a good preset. And seeing that the settings are pretty much the same in v3, the "you didn't tweak it enough" line won't really work.

    Apart from it sounding very synthetic, the feeling of "connection" between the key and sound got better with v3 I think. Maybe it's an illusion, but I feel it's better. At moments I could imagine the hammer moving. So, that's a good thing. It's been pianoteq's main strength since day one.

    At the end of the day though, imho it's still got a (long) ways to go in the realism department, so it's definitely a no-go for me. I still do support their endeavor tho. It's an incredible feat, and it's nice at least one company is focused on making a good physmod softsynth.

    Oh yeah, I didn't understand why they had a rhodes and wurlitzer in there. They're not bad.. it's just uh... maybe they'd want to get the piano right before they move on to other stuff? Besides, we already have enough physmod rhodes and wurlitzers. We even have free ones that sound pretty darn good. Maybe the marketing department suggest value adds or something. Forget eps, I'd pay double the current price if it had just one killer piano.

  4. #4

    Re: pianoteq's new update

    Hey kensuguro--We've met on the PianoTeq site. If I remember right, we've gone head to head about the sound of the presets before.

    Be that as it may, from what I can gather, PianoTeq was originally conceived for classical playing. I play rock and blues. What gives me the sound I want:

    1. I've been reducing the 3 upper partials by about 4 decibels to get a sound I like--the presets are geared more towards classical piano, with few chords in the midrange. (By default, chords in the midrange don't have enough definition for me.) Sometimes I reduce the 3rd partial by a decibel or two.

    2. I use the hard curve in the Velocity response window, and sometimes pull down lower strikes even more AND reduce the Dynamics, so these soft strikes sound louder and closer.

    3. For playing with headphones, I move the head closer to the keyboard and to the left, so the lower midrange has more bass and presence. A very little movement to the left makes a huge difference. For playing with monitors, I'm still experimenting. A mic on the floor for the bass seems to work, along with adjusting the delay on the mics page so there isn't any delay.

    4. I've been working with the new C3 Worn-out preset, too. By default, it sounds more like the pianos I've played. Much less pure.

    Did you try the preset I posted in the Files area--the C2 Strong EQ thing? Very much a work in progress, but is it closer to the sound that you want? (I'm still not satisfied with it at low velocities, but I like the way it opens up with harder strikes--I've been playing blues with it, mainly.)

    By the way, which sample libraries do you like?

  5. #5

    Re: pianoteq's new update

    Okay, in a nutshell my problem is 90% with the area from maybe the G below middle C to the E or F above it (from memory, but roughly that area). That area is fine played softly (pretty much the whole piano is beautiful and controllable played softly --- one area I have particular trouble with in sample sets), but when starting to add velocity, that particular area starts sounding kind of buzzy or electronic or otherwise inorganic.

    I tried playing with the partials, but in my few minutes of experimenting, none of them seemed to control that buzzy component. The only thing so far that I could find that mitigated it was to mix in a couple of distant mics, as in the C3-recording preset. That's not really fixing it though, that's just making it harder to hear at the expense of being forced to live with possibly unwanted ambience.

    Have you (or anyone) found a way to round out and make more organic that middle area? Do any of the other models (bechstein? or the one that begins with an "e"?) work better?

  6. #6

    Re: pianoteq's new update

    Well, i wanted a very dry sound, like a pop/rock piano. I fixed right mic and "studied" about 100 positions for left mic, moving it of 1 millimeter each time (the 2 mics are 40-50cm far).

    Here is the result i like (.fxp for PianoTeq 3)

    Timbre is quite even over all keys. I control it with my RD700sx with a keytouch between medium and heavy, and i really think now to use in place of samples (loading time is also a great advantage). EQ can be set better, but the aim is to show the idea.

  7. #7

    Re: pianoteq's new update

    Hi jake.

    I didn't get around to the new presents from the forums yet. I'm not really sure if the parameters is the thing.. or more accurately, I'm not sure if the parameters are any different from what they were from v2, so I'm not sure if you can even achieve a different sound, apart from the model itself being improved. In which case we really don't have much control over it.

    I use sampletekk tbo, black grand, and bluthner digital. I'm very much a yamaha kinda guy when it comes to acoustics, so you can see why I'm not too happy about pianoteq sound, which seems to be more akin to vintage european pianos in classic recordings. I even think the bluthner is too mellow, and get very tired because I'm constantly trying to stay in the top 2-3 velocity layers.

    Maybe I just need to fiddle some more, or.. well, at this point I don't really care too much because I already spent too much time fiddling with it anyway. My goal is not to become a virtual piano technician, I want just to keep writing and playing. And fiddling with this thing takes too much time. It's a good tech demo, but still, it's not very practical for me.

    About your preset, I did find a c2 chamber close, but not the one you mentioned.. I can't try it out at the moment since pt3 demo is installed on another machine, but I'll check it out when I get some time.

  8. #8

    Re: pianoteq's new update


    The sympathetic resonance emulation is still wrong when you depress the sustain pedal and
    some keys are still undampered.

    Perhaps it will be fixed in the next update.

    G.Steinway Basic overtones emulation is far better than Pianoteq

  9. #9

    Re: pianoteq's new update

    glittle: the Bluthner Digital Model One is really strong at this area as well, probably more so than any other sampled piano I've encountered yet (and better than my memory of Pianoteq 2).

    Kensuguro: Use a tool like Veleocity Curve SM and you can make sure your minimum velocity values stay in the range you intend. It's not very hard, though I personally don't try to reach into those two ranges as often myself.

    I haven't heard Pianoteq version 3 yet, so I am curious.

  10. #10

    Re: pianoteq's new update

    yeah, I ended up writing a jesusonic script for reaper (I use reaper for practice) that allows me to control the velocity with an exponential curve, with extreme detail. BDMO's layers seem definitely biased towards quiet timbres, I'm not sure if it's just the piano, or the way it was sampled.

    I still really like bdmo though. It just sounds so good. I still haven't heard of a sample lib that sounds so good. It does tend to get burried in a busy mix, like with electronic instruments, and I can't seem to eq up the high end, since it barely exists in most of the layers (since they're so soft). But the sound of the piano by itself is so good to listen to. It's actually a very inspiring sound.

Go Back to forum


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts