Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards Pianoteq 4 released

Although I've reviewed Pianoteq in the past (v3.6.0) my opinion above was based on a quick listen through good quality headphones, where I was not deeply evaluating every bit or byte. The fakeness of the piano sound pretty much smacked me in the face. It may be quite responsive to play live however.

In-depth sound technology analysis and casual listening aren't a zero-sum game - i.e. one doesn't preclude the other. Of course, being skilled at one doesn't mean a given reviewer is necessarily skilled in the other, though I will say that doing technology reviews on a regular basis exposes a person to a LOT of piano sounds.

Of course, this comes from someone who knows absolutely nothing about what it is they are dealing with.

It is similar to someone (who doesn't play any musical instrument) hearing you playing one of your jazz pieces and saying ... "Wow, he has been practicing all this time and THAT is the best he can do ?"

Pretty Rude, Huh ?

I tried to write the same piece on the Kontakt5/Steinway, that's what happened -
http://soundcloud.com/yuripavl/to-ni-veter-kontank5-steinway.
In my opinion, it's just awful. If Pianoteq sang (http://soundcloud.com/yuripavl/toniveter), then Kontakt walked like an elephant, and I had nothing to do with it. Nothing. But it is the specificity of this piece. Many other pieces Kontakt sounds great!

Insulting a person is rude, products not so much.

From someone who certainly doesn't have the skills of you or others discussing this have, this is my impression of those two:

The pianoteq example is more expressive and dynamic, but it doesn't sound like a piano. It sounds like something pretending to be a piano. It may be better to use for expression, but it sounds like a cheap piano synth compared to the second.

Correct, however in this case you were specifically referring to 'the PT guys', noting that 'this is all they have to show for it'.

James
x

James, are you suggesting we should pull our punches regarding our personal opinions of DPs in the "Synths & Keyboards" section of the PW fora for fear of offending some developer somewhere? If one can't let one's hair down here, where can one?

One is free to let one's hair down wherever one chooses.

However, the point that I - and I believe dmd - was making is that some folks on this forum are far too quick to criticise the work of others. It's all too easy for armchair experts to attack companies when their software and hardware doesn't meet users' lofty expectations. But let's not forget that behind every company there are individuals working hard on their respective projects, trying their best to improve the playing experience for piano fans.

I'm fortunate enough to frequently work alongside such guys (although I'm based in a different building and department), and am always astounded by their desire and passion to do the best possible job. I'm sure the same is true of folks at Yamaha, Roland, Korg, and other hardware manufacturers and software developers around the world.

Of course, I'm not saying don't criticise, just show a little more respect for the work and achievements of others. If you're not a fan of Pianoteq, that's fine, but please don't slag-off the development team with arrogant lines like "...is that all they have to show for it?"

Cheers,
James
x

When I play on the Pianoteq, my head is like a piano inside, not outside. Perhaps this is the cause of "cheap" sound. But believe me, it absolutely does not stop playing music! From my point of view, the possibility of intonation is much more important rich sound. But this personally, I think so.

+1!

Thankyou so much for posting this. You've touched on many points for which I couldn't agree more.

On the one hand, you're absolutely right.
On the other hand, the developers add a keyboard mechanism escapement and announce his new achievement (Roland). But in the real keyboard, this mechanism only when there is a quiet play and did not feel at loud! However, Roland keyboards, it is always there! Why the developers did not consider it?
It is possible that Kawai made ​​more intelligently (I do not know).
The impression is that the developers, instead of as close to the acoustic features DP, coming up next marketing decisions.

couldn't agree more.

P.S.
I'm using pianoteq since version 3 and i love it. In fact thanks to pianoteq i have switched to software pianos after years of playing sampled dps.

Yeah, I wasn't trying to say one was more important than the other. That's really a personal preference. I was just trying to say there are some pretty clear differences, even to someone who hasn't spent a lot of time around pianos.

I haven't tried Pianoteq. I do have Ivory II. Just want to say that I have a hard time criticising the software when I know I don't have high end hardware. Even just the driver. Things like this can make a big difference. I use, and know others here are using a presonus interface to their computer. That isn't a very good interface.
Especially when people are comparing to a true acoustic piano.
I take such criticisms of pianoteq with a big big grain of salt.
Let me hear it through truly high end hardware. Then I'll criticise...obsessively.

I still think software piano's are way ahead of the game.

James, you must faint dead away when reading movie reviews.

All criticism is constructive to one degree or another. If DP and piano software manufacturers are at all interested in improving their products they should listen to the moaning and groaning of their users on the web. Lord knows DPs have lots of catching up to do.

No, because most (respected) film critics:

- are paid to review films
- spend many hours each day watching films
- have an understanding of the film industry
- publish reviews under their real name
- are passionate about cinema as an art-form
- have close connections with film directors, producers, and actors
- present well-constructed, insightful arguments
- are respected film critics





How is the above criticism constructive?



They are, and they do.



With software pianos? Yes, I agree that software pianos offer superior sound quality to most, if not all, digital pianos. But that's largely due to software piano developers being able to rely on a powerful, pre-existing hardware and software platform. Digital piano developers do not have this luxury.

Kind regards,
James
x

Well, it should be noted that the backlash against and criticism of PianoTeq is not a random occurance and it's not just because of the way it sounds. PianoTeq as a company and more especially its users are constantly raving about it saying it makes all other pianos completely obsolete for years and years.

Specifically, for years and years what you hear is "PianoTeq is ALMOST there. Just wait until the NEXT version. It will be the version to end all other digitals."

This type of comments naturally make one build up expectations for the next version, even if one is not a fan of the current version. Well, one version after another passes and they are all characteristically PianoTeq.

So I think this type of comment is completely natural in this context. It's not like the company and its users have been humble about it, or that versions have come out without a lot of fanfare--this one had like a year of buildup. If the company and users were humble and came out with a new version with a normal amount of buildup, it kind of would seem mean for people to ask why they *still* can't get it right.

I didn't see anyone in the forums a year ago saying when Ivory American Grand finally comes out, it will be the end of digital pianos as you know it. Consequently, when it does come out, you won't hear critics wondering why they can't get it right after all these years.

It's perfectly legit for producers and enthusiasts to talk about innovations, but when the claims are way overblown for long periods of time, you are likely to get backlash when the product comes out and doesn't live up to expectations.

I think it's true that there are a lot of passionate and hardworking engineers working in both the software and hardware DP sectors, and they do deserve our respect, whether or not we like their creations.

And then there are the marketers.

I'm sorry, but I really do feel that marketing departments make the most outlandish, spurious and meaningless claims for their products. We are always trying to read between the lines. If marketers were to be believed, we live in the most perfect, idyllic world, where nothing can ever be amiss.

Fortunately, in software-only products, it is very easy, and usually relatively inexpensive, to test the claims. And it's very easy to upgrade when new releases are available. In hardware, you run up against the corporate need to pare manufacturing costs to the bare minimum, and the marketers desire to segment the market to suit. This results in products that are frequently significantly behind the curve in terms of what is technically feasible, and a very expensive upgrade path that is measured in minuscule steps. And those hardworking engineers must usually bow to this corporate agenda. (Edit: do you guys remember the '70s and '80s when new products in this field were genuinely exciting and on the cutting edge - where everyone in the company was passionate about the product?)

In relation to Pianoteq, this is actually a company that is pushing the envelope. Whether you like the sound or not (I find it [v3.6] difficult to accept for extended use) they are providing a very inexpensive alternative to both hardware and sampled software. Their marketing department may indeed make ridiculous claims, but at least for less than 100 euros you can put them to the test. That's one heck of a lot better than the alternatives.

I agree that version 4 did not match expectations, in general. I also agree that this will spark a certain amount of criticism. I do not agree that the criticism be directed at the competence of the development team by someone who knows nothing at all about the issues or the difficulties involved in such a project.


Here is a reply of what started this whole conversation, broken into various parts.



I consider this a legitimate (personal) criticism. This is how he hears it and feels about it. Fine.



That was unwarranted considering he has no knowledge of issues involved.




This seems to indicate he has some knowledge of scientific concepts and could be a possible reason for the problems PT is experiencing. No problem.



This seems to have a basis in some personal experience with copy protection which can find no reason for in my experience with PT. Granted, an attempt at levity ... probably misplaced.
Sounds a little mean spirited.

MY bottom line ...

You do not like the product ? Criticize to your hearts content. But, please do not take shots at the developers unless you have some specific expertise which gives you the right to do so. Just seems to be in poor taste.

The original statement says that they've been working on Pianoteq for a long time (true) and that it's not very good (legitimate opinion). I see no problem with that at all.

"Kind of weird that the PT guys have been working on this product for so long and this is all they have to show for it."
"That was unwarranted considering he has no knowledge of issues involved."

Knowledge of the issues involved is not pertinent. I don't really care what the issues are. I buy products, not the seller's problems.