Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums
Over 2.7 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers (it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

SEARCH
Piano Forums & Piano World
(ad)
Piano Life Saver - Dampp Chaser
Dampp Chaser Piano Life Saver
What's Hot!!
PIANO TEACHERS Please read this!
-------------------
European Tour for Piano Lovers
JOIN US FOR THE TOUR!
--------------------
Posting Pictures on the Forums
-------------------
Forums RULES & HELP
-------------------
ADVERTISE on Piano World
(ad)
Best of Piano Buyer
 Best of Piano Buyer
Find a Professional
Our Classified Ads
Find Piano Professionals-

*Piano Dealers - Piano Stores
*Piano Tuners
*Piano Teachers
*Piano Movers
*Piano Restorations
*Piano Manufacturers

Advertise on Piano World

Who's Online Now
76 registered members (2Be3, cliowa, Alex C, barbaram, Beowulf, amad23, 90125, 15 invisible), 899 guests, and 3 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
(ad)
Estonia Pianos
Estonia Pianos
Quick Links to Useful Piano & Music Resources
Quick Links:
*Advertise On Piano World
*Free Piano Newsletter
*Online Piano Recitals
*Piano Recitals Index
*Piano & Music Accessories
*Live Piano Venues
*Music School Listings
* Buying a Piano
*Buying A Acoustic Piano
*Buying a Digital Piano
*Pianos for Sale
*Sell Your Piano
*How Old is My Piano?
*Directory/Site Map
*Virtual Piano
*Music Word Search
*Piano Videos
*Virtual Piano Chords & Scales
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 18 of 29 1 2 16 17 18 19 20 28 29
Re: Pianoteq 6! [Re: Alexsms] #2676351
09/19/17 05:28 PM
09/19/17 05:28 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 965
R
R_B Offline
500 Post Club Member
R_B  Offline
500 Post Club Member
R

Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 965
Originally Posted by Alexsms
Originally Posted by MacMacMac
This has been said before ...

And does it matter? It only matters what the user/buyer thinks.


Well, we doesn't know what they think. We only know what very narrow vocal minority represented on this forum thinks (without any offense intended). And we don't know to what extent we can trust anything said here by anybody, including myself smile People can have strong (sometimes, unconscious) prejudice against something, their equipment may be faulty, or they may be not very good in dealing with hardware or software. And you can't completely rule out possibility of competitors trying to decrease value of others products, in this age and time of huge advertisement companies openly hiring people to shift public profile of certain products and companies by passing as regular users on forums. And pianoworld is certainly would be in their list, being a huge community of pro musicians.

There is a well-established cult of tube sound lovers, for example, which goes beyond a mere affection to a "nice noise". People spend ridiculous amounts of money buying some specially shielded cables and specially crafted stands for them. Afaik, few proper researches and blind tests have been able to proof those investments actually change anything in the final sound, comparing to relatively inexpensive hardware. Yet, this business thrives even today. What teaches us that a lot of those issues with some sound may happen only in somebody's head.

That's why a solid, scientifically sound research has potential to put an end to this, showing there is little to no differences in both signals. Then some customer's opinion stops matter that much, unless there is a proof that it's shared by majority of customers with enough experience in the field.


Somewhere in the pianoteq forum there are some scope traces of the version 5 modeled "Steinway" (before they had the endorsement) and scope traces of a physical example of the same model Steinway - along with some commentary on microphone placement, the measuring process and the differences, which as I recall were slight.
It may be worth looking up if you are interested in "quantitative measurements" of Pianoteq vs the instruments it emulates.

(ad) ROLAND

Click Here

Re: Pianoteq 6! [Re: Pete14] #2676352
09/19/17 05:30 PM
09/19/17 05:30 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 7,271
Raleigh, North Carolina
MacMacMac Offline
7000 Post Club Member
MacMacMac  Offline
7000 Post Club Member

Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 7,271
Raleigh, North Carolina
I can appreciate sound.
Does a scope trace have any such appreciation?

Re: Pianoteq 6! [Re: Alexsms] #2676353
09/19/17 05:31 PM
09/19/17 05:31 PM
Joined: Apr 2016
Posts: 28
A
Alexsms Offline
Full Member
Alexsms  Offline
Full Member
A

Joined: Apr 2016
Posts: 28
Originally Posted by Alexsms
Like, perhaps, by generating a midi file from acoustic Steinway (I know there are ways to achieve it), while recording its sound; then generating output from Ptq6 with this midi as well (while tweaking velocity curve to correspond to keyboard of the original piano somehow), then do whatever frequency analysis magic on it and show that whatever differences are there, they are way below some reasonable margin of error? I'm not a sound engineer and know nothing about tools available there in this age and time, so not sure whether it's all makes sense. But have anybody tried something like this before? Have Modart present such studies of their own (I guess they should do it a lot, while working on the software)?


Ok, I'm over-complicating things myself now, we can take shortcut here and go with one of those sampled pianos which have been presented as superior to Ptq. This comparison will be much easier to pull through, and for others to re-run analysis and check for themselves. I wonder whether somebody has already done this in the past.

Re: Pianoteq 6! [Re: MacMacMac] #2676354
09/19/17 05:33 PM
09/19/17 05:33 PM
Joined: Apr 2016
Posts: 28
A
Alexsms Offline
Full Member
Alexsms  Offline
Full Member
A

Joined: Apr 2016
Posts: 28
Originally Posted by MacMacMac
I can appreciate sound.
Does a scope trace have any such appreciation?


We are frail, complex, sometimes messy beings smile That's why placebo really works. We can't trust ourselves. We can't trust science completely too, but it's much less often mistaken than we are.

Last edited by Alexsms; 09/19/17 05:37 PM.
(ad) SWEETWATER
Sweetwater - Lowest Prices on Gear
Re: Pianoteq 6! [Re: peterws] #2676355
09/19/17 05:38 PM
09/19/17 05:38 PM
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 11,243
B
bennevis Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
bennevis  Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
B

Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 11,243
Originally Posted by peterws
Originally Posted by Beakybird
In the world of food, there are such thing as supertasters who have an augmented ability to taste foods and are hypersensitive to bitter tastes. Maybe for piano sounds you Pianoteq naysayers are like supertasters. Unfortunately for the supertasters, they don't live as long because they don't eat their vegetables.


Somebody once said "You are what you eat"
I been eating veg for too long . . . . . . .

I never vegetate. Instead, I cogitate grin .

Supertasters leave the foul-tasting stuff (Brussel sprouts, cauliflower etc) to eaters less well-endowed, and stick to the good stuff instead - colourful sweet veg with lots of antioxidants like peppers (USA = capsicum), carrots, tomatoes (OK, I know it's a fruit....) etc. So, they live longer.....

As for piano players, you are what you play, not what you play on. So what if Pianoteq (or Roland) doesn't sound like Steinway? I've played Steinways which don't sound like Steinways, Yamahas which don't sound like Yamahas, Blüthners which don't sound like Blüthners, etc, etc. And all in the same piano showroom. What does it matter, as long as you 'connect' with the instrument, and it allows you to do what you want to do?

As a well-known concert pianist once told me, you have to find the sweet spot of the piano that you're playing on, and make it work for you, regardless of what its inherent tonal characteristics are. If you can't find the piano's sweet spot, either you or the piano needs some improvement........ wink


"I don't play accurately - anyone can play accurately - but I play with wonderful expression. As far as the piano is concerned, sentiment is my forte. I keep science for Life."
Re: Pianoteq 6! [Re: Pete14] #2676374
09/19/17 06:45 PM
09/19/17 06:45 PM
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,203
P
Pete14 Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
Pete14  Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
P

Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,203
Have you played V-Pianos which don't sound like V-Pianos?

Re: Pianoteq 6! [Re: Pete14] #2676393
09/19/17 07:49 PM
09/19/17 07:49 PM
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 11,243
B
bennevis Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
bennevis  Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
B

Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 11,243
Originally Posted by Pete14
Have you played V-Pianos which don't sound like V-Pianos?

Of course.

No V-Piano sounds like a V-Piano. (If it did, it wouldn't be a V-Piano wink ).

Apropos of which, as I hinted before, if you want to be a pianist, you have to be able to adapt to any action and any sound. In the recent Scottish International Piano Competition, all competitors had to play on the new Bösendorfer 280VC in round 1, Steinway D in round 2, and Fazioli F278 in round 3. Finalists got to choose their piano for the concerto - and the winner was a PW member. Read about it here:
http://forum.pianoworld.com/ubbthreads.php/topics/2674364/congratulations-can-akmur.html#Post2674364

BTW, all the finalists chose Fazioli.


"I don't play accurately - anyone can play accurately - but I play with wonderful expression. As far as the piano is concerned, sentiment is my forte. I keep science for Life."
Re: Pianoteq 6! [Re: Pete14] #2676403
09/19/17 08:14 PM
09/19/17 08:14 PM
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,667
Chicago, Illinois
David Farley Offline
1000 Post Club Member
David Farley  Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,667
Chicago, Illinois
Originally Posted by Pete14
Have you played V-Pianos which don't sound like V-Pianos?


Wasn't someone complaining that the V-Piano in their Integra-7 didn't sound like a V-Piano?


Last edited by David Farley; 09/19/17 08:14 PM.
Re: Pianoteq 6! [Re: Alexsms] #2676419
09/19/17 10:05 PM
09/19/17 10:05 PM
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,363
Groove On Offline
1000 Post Club Member
Groove On  Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,363
Originally Posted by Alexsms
That's why a solid, scientifically sound research has potential to put an end to this ...

That could be the opening line of a Star Trek episode where Commander Data finds out otherwise. grin

We're really down to cave man logic, "Me Like" or "Me NOOOT Liiiiiiike!!!" - every cogent, intelligent, well-thought out, witty post in this thread can be successfully punchlined with either one. Even when selecting an acoustic instrument it's very practical advice to look for the one that "Me Like".



We are the music makers,
And we are the dreamers of dreams.
Re: Pianoteq 6! [Re: bennevis] #2676421
09/19/17 10:13 PM
09/19/17 10:13 PM
Joined: Aug 2016
Posts: 2,324
G
Gombessa Offline
2000 Post Club Member
Gombessa  Offline
2000 Post Club Member
G

Joined: Aug 2016
Posts: 2,324
Bennevis,

Thanks for the interlude that was a welcome break from all the PT/modeling/sampling back and forth. I for one sometimes forget the P in DP stands for "piano" smile

Originally Posted by bennevis
BTW, all the finalists chose Fazioli.


Btw, from the thread, it sounds like everyone chose the Fazioli because:

Quote
In the final we could chose and i (like everybody) chose Fazioli because they were actually the only company to send technicians to look after their instrument.


Didn't sound like it had much to do with the actual preference of instrument as opposed to ensuring a better chance of being in proper tune/regulation, though this goes to your point of being able to adjust to any action and sound (also something Pianomanchuck has stressed before).


Yamaha P-85, P-105, CP50 || Kawai NV-10, MP11
Re: Pianoteq 6! [Re: MacMacMac] #2676476
09/20/17 06:46 AM
09/20/17 06:46 AM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 965
R
R_B Offline
500 Post Club Member
R_B  Offline
500 Post Club Member
R

Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 965
Originally Posted by MacMacMac
I can appreciate sound.
Does a scope trace have any such appreciation?


I'm not arguing it either way, just trying to help someone who seemed to be looking for something QUANTITATIVE.

OK, I'll devolve with you a little.
Any "I" that responds to sound includes psychological components.
The point of comparing scope traces would be to see what differences there are in the emitted sound between Pianoteq and a physical wooden piano (microphones, electronics, speakers, etc included in whichever chains).
This is before "appreciation" has joined the chain.

Re: Pianoteq 6! [Re: Pete14] #2676490
09/20/17 07:59 AM
09/20/17 07:59 AM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 7,271
Raleigh, North Carolina
MacMacMac Offline
7000 Post Club Member
MacMacMac  Offline
7000 Post Club Member

Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 7,271
Raleigh, North Carolina
My points are:
1. To the designer all of the quantitative reasons, the design elements, the techno stuff ... all of that matters because it may help him with the design of a piano.
2. To the user/performer/audience, only the sound matters. They (and I) don't design pianos. So those quantitative reasons don't matter.

Item one is input information. It's interesting, but I can't really make use of it. And I can't make anything with it.
Item two is output. That's what I care about.

Re: Pianoteq 6! [Re: R_B] #2676492
09/20/17 08:39 AM
09/20/17 08:39 AM
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,634
Suffolk, United Kingdom
E
EssBrace Online content
3000 Post Club Member
EssBrace  Online Content
3000 Post Club Member
E

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,634
Suffolk, United Kingdom
Originally Posted by R_B
OK, I'll devolve with you a little.
Any "I" that responds to sound includes psychological components.
The point of comparing scope traces would be to see what differences there are in the emitted sound between Pianoteq and a physical wooden piano (microphones, electronics, speakers, etc included in whichever chains).
This is before "appreciation" has joined the chain.


You're assuming that everything that can be heard, or perceived in some way, can be measured. I'm not so sure about that.


Roland RD-1000 | Nord Piano 3 | Dexibell Vivo P7 | Yamaha CLP 645
Re: Pianoteq 6! [Re: Pete14] #2676505
09/20/17 09:42 AM
09/20/17 09:42 AM
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 647
K
karvala Offline
500 Post Club Member
karvala  Offline
500 Post Club Member
K

Joined: May 2017
Posts: 647
Even if everything can be measured (and I agree that's at least debatable), there remain a number of issues, including a rather fundamental ontological problem. Midi is a non-starter; you cannot get midi directly out of a standard acoustic instrument, and I'm not sure you'd want midi here anyway. You can of course record audio, and then do various forms of time-frequency analysis on that.

Defining how close is "close enough" in terms of distance in a spectrogram is problematic and subjective, but you could modify the design to compare a sampled instrument vs acoustic instrument and Pianoteq vs acoustic instrument, to get something more directly comparable, i.e. a difference of respective distances. Then you have the problem of choosing which sampled instrument, and with what settings - a problem you also have with Pianoteq.

Assuming that could be agreed, however, you still have a fundamental problem, which is that you're not comparing an acoustic instrument with the respective candidates, you're comparing a recording of an acoustic instrument. As any player of sampled pianos knows, that's very much not the same thing. Once again run into problems of parameter choices: which microphones to make the recording, positioned where, what sort of audio processing is undertaken afterwards etc..

I guess the closest you could come would be to record in a player perspective and then filter the audio using an auditory perception model, to get as close as possible to what is actually heard, in both cases. The technology isn't there for that, yet, however; there are some pretty good cochlear models around, but not so much for higher order processing necessary even for good timbre perception, and that's without even considering the top-down impact of prior learning and memory.

So it's a nice idea, but regrettably I don't think it's viable.


Broadwood, Yamaha U1; Kawai CA67; Pianoteq Std (D4, K2, Blüthner, Grotrian), Garritan CFX Full, Galaxy Vintage D, The Grandeur, Ravenscroft 275, Ivory II ACD, TrueKeys Italian, AS C7, Production Grand Compact, AK Studio Grand, AK Upright, Waves Grand Rhapsody; Sennheiser HD-600 and HD-650, O2 amp
Re: Pianoteq 6! [Re: Pete14] #2676525
09/20/17 11:37 AM
09/20/17 11:37 AM
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 517
Virginia, USA
K
Kbeaumont Offline
500 Post Club Member
Kbeaumont  Offline
500 Post Club Member
K

Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 517
Virginia, USA
The quickest way to make an acoustic piano sound very different and at times bad? Move it into a different room. My college had a baby grand that sounded great in one room, but as soon as we rolled it into a different room it lost all its magic. Thought it was maybe the tuning, nope roll it back and it sounded way better. No two pianos sound exactly alike or play exactly the same either. Its easy to over analyze things.


A long long time ago, I can still remember
How that music used to make me smile....
Re: Pianoteq 6! [Re: EssBrace] #2676528
09/20/17 12:13 PM
09/20/17 12:13 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 965
R
R_B Offline
500 Post Club Member
R_B  Offline
500 Post Club Member
R

Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 965
Originally Posted by EssBrace
Originally Posted by R_B
OK, I'll devolve with you a little.
Any "I" that responds to sound includes psychological components.
The point of comparing scope traces would be to see what differences there are in the emitted sound between Pianoteq and a physical wooden piano (microphones, electronics, speakers, etc included in whichever chains).
This is before "appreciation" has joined the chain.


You're assuming that everything that can be heard, or perceived in some way, can be measured. I'm not so sure about that.


I am "assuming" no such thing.
I was merely responding to a poster who seemed to be in search of something that quantified the differences between the sound emitted from pianoteq and the sound emitted from a physical wooden piano - that was ALL.

The devolution was amusement in pointing out that "appreciation" involves psychological components (emotions, etc.) that are not in the chain when it is ended at the input leads of a scope.

This is, after all a thread about pianoteq and it is in the sub forum about digital pianos - - it seems appropriate to LEAVE OUT the subjective and emotional components.
By all means add those onto the chain if you wish, but don't accuse ME of assumptions about their presence at the scope's leads.


I could have gone with my initial response, which was approximately; If it isn't an element of sound that can be detected then it isn't an element of sound that we can hear.
Yes, I really DO believe that microphones can detect elements of sound both above and beyond the range of human hearing - dispute that if you wish.

I also believe that I could set up a (very dishonest) experiment that would show two sounds to be identical - sounds which are clearly NOT the same.
That would be dishonest and I have no interest in doing it.

Re: Pianoteq 6! [Re: karvala] #2676530
09/20/17 12:21 PM
09/20/17 12:21 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 965
R
R_B Offline
500 Post Club Member
R_B  Offline
500 Post Club Member
R

Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 965
Originally Posted by karvala
Even if everything can be measured (and I agree that's at least debatable), there remain a number of issues, including a rather fundamental ontological problem. Midi is a non-starter; you cannot get midi directly out of a standard acoustic instrument, and I'm not sure you'd want midi here anyway. You can of course record audio, and then do various forms of time-frequency analysis on that.

Defining how close is "close enough" in terms of distance in a spectrogram is problematic and subjective, but you could modify the design to compare a sampled instrument vs acoustic instrument and Pianoteq vs acoustic instrument, to get something more directly comparable, i.e. a difference of respective distances. Then you have the problem of choosing which sampled instrument, and with what settings - a problem you also have with Pianoteq.

Assuming that could be agreed, however, you still have a fundamental problem, which is that you're not comparing an acoustic instrument with the respective candidates, you're comparing a recording of an acoustic instrument. As any player of sampled pianos knows, that's very much not the same thing. Once again run into problems of parameter choices: which microphones to make the recording, positioned where, what sort of audio processing is undertaken afterwards etc..

I guess the closest you could come would be to record in a player perspective and then filter the audio using an auditory perception model, to get as close as possible to what is actually heard, in both cases. The technology isn't there for that, yet, however; there are some pretty good cochlear models around, but not so much for higher order processing necessary even for good timbre perception, and that's without even considering the top-down impact of prior learning and memory.

So it's a nice idea, but regrettably I don't think it's viable.




Much of that problem already exists between examples of same manufacturer, same model wooden pianos.
No two Steinweg Ds are in fact the "same", no two M&H Bs, etc.

I suspect that if high quality recordings of several different S&S Bs were put before a panel of folk with "golden ears" they would disagree on which were "best", or if you suggested to them that there was a ringer in the bunch they would pick out different ones as the electronic one.

Close enough really IS close enough.
Many/most of us don't play well enough for the differences to matter anyway - and I for one would spend my time better in practice than in arguing these points.

So, I'm off to practice.

Peace, Out.

Re: Pianoteq 6! [Re: R_B] #2676578
09/20/17 05:26 PM
09/20/17 05:26 PM
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,634
Suffolk, United Kingdom
E
EssBrace Online content
3000 Post Club Member
EssBrace  Online Content
3000 Post Club Member
E

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,634
Suffolk, United Kingdom
Originally Posted by R_B
Originally Posted by EssBrace
Originally Posted by R_B
OK, I'll devolve with you a little.
Any "I" that responds to sound includes psychological components.
The point of comparing scope traces would be to see what differences there are in the emitted sound between Pianoteq and a physical wooden piano (microphones, electronics, speakers, etc included in whichever chains).
This is before "appreciation" has joined the chain.


You're assuming that everything that can be heard, or perceived in some way, can be measured. I'm not so sure about that.


I am "assuming" no such thing.
I was merely responding to a poster who seemed to be in search of something that quantified the differences between the sound emitted from pianoteq and the sound emitted from a physical wooden piano - that was ALL.

The devolution was amusement in pointing out that "appreciation" involves psychological components (emotions, etc.) that are not in the chain when it is ended at the input leads of a scope.

This is, after all a thread about pianoteq and it is in the sub forum about digital pianos - - it seems appropriate to LEAVE OUT the subjective and emotional components.
By all means add those onto the chain if you wish, but don't accuse ME of assumptions about their presence at the scope's leads.


I could have gone with my initial response, which was approximately; If it isn't an element of sound that can be detected then it isn't an element of sound that we can hear.
Yes, I really DO believe that microphones can detect elements of sound both above and beyond the range of human hearing - dispute that if you wish.

I also believe that I could set up a (very dishonest) experiment that would show two sounds to be identical - sounds which are clearly NOT the same.
That would be dishonest and I have no interest in doing it.



Blimey. I don't know what's pressed your buttons but please direct your shouty little posts at someone else.


Roland RD-1000 | Nord Piano 3 | Dexibell Vivo P7 | Yamaha CLP 645
Re: Pianoteq 6! [Re: Pete14] #2676580
09/20/17 05:36 PM
09/20/17 05:36 PM
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 521
B
Beakybird Offline
500 Post Club Member
Beakybird  Offline
500 Post Club Member
B

Joined: May 2014
Posts: 521
Some here are perhaps too quick to take offense.


Roland FP-90; Yamaha MX49; Pianoteq 5 + most add-ons; 2 Yamaha HS8s; ATH-M50X; Focusrite Saffire 2i2; For performing: Yamaha PSR-S970; FBT Maxx 2a's, Crowne Headset Mic.
Re: Pianoteq 6! [Re: Pete14] #2676593
09/20/17 06:38 PM
09/20/17 06:38 PM
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,918
Sydney, Australia
S
sullivang Offline
2000 Post Club Member
sullivang  Offline
2000 Post Club Member
S

Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,918
Sydney, Australia
Re some kind of proof that Pianoteq is as good as or better than sampled pianos, double blind testing would be pretty effective I think. Double blind testing was used to prove that people can't tell the difference between 16-bit 44.1kHz audio and anything with a higher sampling rate and/or bit-depth (for final presentation, at least) and if anyone tells me they CAN, my response will be that I'm skeptical, but you might be right - if you want to convince ME, you'll have to set up a test that I'm happy with. (credit to Dewster who alerted us to this test, btw)

Greg.


Middle-aged Jeremy Clarkson acolyte.
Page 18 of 29 1 2 16 17 18 19 20 28 29

Moderated by  Piano World 

(ad)
Pianoteq
PianoTeq Petrof
(ad)
Sweetwater - Keyboards
Sweetwater
ad
Jazz Piano Online
Jazz Piano Lessons Online

New Topics - Multiple Forums
Help, pain when playing the piano!
by Hengsen10. 01/21/19 01:18 AM
Piano Layout/Piano Size
by adamjh. 01/21/19 01:12 AM
Gator case for Yamaha P-515?
by ec. 01/20/19 10:48 PM
A visit to Guitar Center
by MacMacMac. 01/20/19 08:27 PM
Forum Statistics
Forums40
Topics189,704
Posts2,784,220
Members92,171
Most Online15,252
Mar 21st, 2010
(ad)
Accu-Tuner
Sanderson Accu-Tuner
Please Support Our Advertisers
Dampp Chaser Piano Life Saver

Sweetwater

PianoTeq Petrof
Piano Buyer Spring 2018
Visit our online store for gifts for music lovers


 
Help keep the forums up and running with a donation, any amount is appreciated!
Or by becoming a Subscribing member! Thank-you.
Donate   Subscribe
 
Our Piano Related Classified Ads
| Dealers | Tuners | Lessons | Movers | Restorations | Pianos For Sale | Sell Your Piano |

Advertise on Piano World
| Subscribe | Piano World | PianoSupplies.com | Advertise on Piano World |
| |Contact | Privacy | Legal | About Us | Site Map | Free Newsletter |


copyright 1997 - 2018 Piano World ® all rights reserved
No part of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.2