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)
Best of Piano Buyer
 Best of Piano Buyer
(ad)
Piano Life Saver - Dampp Chaser
Dampp Chaser Piano Life Saver
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

(ad)
Accu-Tuner
Sanderson Accu-Tuner
Who's Online Now
73 registered members (BearLake, ando, amyram, albydooby, AWilley, anotherscott, 36251, 14 invisible), 866 guests, and 473 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
Hop To
Page 4 of 5 1 2 3 4 5
Re: Acoustic Steinway Model B vs Pianoteq Model B [Re: stamkorg] #2757510 08/10/18 06:15 PM
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,884
JoeT Offline
1000 Post Club Member
Offline
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,884
Originally Posted by stamkorg
except the Garritan CFX, which sampled piano has no flaws with velocity jumps, pedaling, noises...?

Yamaha, Kawai and older Roland?


Yamaha P-515 | Kawai ES100 | Steinberg UR22 | Sony MDR-7506
(ad) SWEETWATER Lowest Prices
Re: Acoustic Steinway Model B vs Pianoteq Model B [Re: mcoll] #2757630 08/11/18 09:12 AM
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 176
N
NormB Offline
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
N
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 176
Well, getting back to the A - B comparison (although this could spiral out to samples Vs modelling), do note one thing: we are listening to the recorded AP Vs the sound generated by PT. This is an important distinction. Just as the weak point in the audio chain on the listening side is speakers (as they are electro-mechanical), the weak point in recording is the microphone. Charted standard specs for all high end microphones look good on the surface, but they nevertheless produce electrical outputs that sound dramatically different from one another on the other (listening) side. If you have any doubt, I recall a fairly controlled test of over a dozen mics on a track on the first Stereophile CD.

The reason I bring this up is that as someone who uses VSTs for personal live time playing getting to the point of 'sounding just like a recorded Steinway' is a grand step, but ultimately an unsatisfactory one. I suppose my long term hope is that 'pure' modelling could take us to the next step towards a more realistic AP sound. That PT may be based on recorded samples is therefore a little distressing to me.

Don't get me wrong: l like PT sufficiently to have just upgraded to Pro. I am pleased with their progress over the years. I am just hoping that their first level (recorded) sonic inputs wouldn't be a long term limitation of their evolution of a true AP sound.

Re: Acoustic Steinway Model B vs Pianoteq Model B [Re: NormB] #2757658 08/11/18 12:37 PM
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 750
L
lophiomys Offline
500 Post Club Member
Offline
500 Post Club Member
L
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 750
Originally Posted by NormB

...
That PT may be based on recorded samples is therefore a little distressing to me.
...

Exactly that was not more than a vague guess by forumite Cybergene. And quickly it is spreading out. FUD is working really well.

For example, if you train a model (e.g. a physics formula with many, many parameters) with the desired output data (e.g. a sound sample of an accoustic grand), in order to find the right set of configuration paramters, it remains still a configurable physical model and would "not be based on recored samples", as a looping ROMpler would be.

Re: Acoustic Steinway Model B vs Pianoteq Model B [Re: mcoll] #2757663 08/11/18 01:17 PM
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,884
JoeT Offline
1000 Post Club Member
Offline
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,884
Originally Posted by lophiomys
For example, if you train a model (e.g. a physics formula with many, many parameters) with the desired output data (e.g. a sound sample of an accoustic grand), in order to find the right set of configuration paramters, it remains still a configurable physical model and would "not be based on recored samples", as a looping ROMpler would be.

To quote someone from this thread:
Originally Posted by MacMacMac
Well, count me as indifferent because I don't really care how it works.
I only care about how it sounds.

The "looping ROMpler" sounds like a Yamaha or Kawai, while the "trained physical model" sounds like a Pianoteq. This is where we are now.

It's the same with vinyl and tape. Both sound like vinyl or tape respectively, providing an imperfect reproduction. Some people even like their signature and still buy vinyls to this day. But a digital audio CD doesn't sound like a CD. It sounds like the source master, it has no signature on its own. And that's what engineers where going for: a perfect digital reproduction, based on 44100 samples per second. The CD reached perfection.

Digital sampling with transparent audio codecs is just the best. We are using it in this very thread to compare a recording from a real against a virtual instrument. It wouldn't work if both would just sound like "SoundCloud upload" or "YouTube audio".


Yamaha P-515 | Kawai ES100 | Steinberg UR22 | Sony MDR-7506
Re: Acoustic Steinway Model B vs Pianoteq Model B [Re: lophiomys] #2757666 08/11/18 01:27 PM
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 176
N
NormB Offline
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
N
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 176
Originally Posted by lophiomys
Originally Posted by NormB

...
That PT may be based on recorded samples is therefore a little distressing to me.
...

Exactly that was not more than a vague guess by forumite Cybergene. And quickly it is spreading out. FUD is working really well.

For example, if you train a model (e.g. a physics formula with many, many parameters) with the desired output data (e.g. a sound sample of an accoustic grand), in order to find the right set of configuration paramters, it remains still a configurable physical model and would "not be based on recored samples", as a looping ROMpler would be.


Got it. Tnx.

Re: Acoustic Steinway Model B vs Pianoteq Model B [Re: mcoll] #2757672 08/11/18 01:44 PM
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 173
R
redfish1901 Offline
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
R
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 173
For what it's worth, I am 100% confident that second repeats are all Pianoteq.

They sounded pretty similar on my iphone speakers. But even on my laptop speakers I was 100% confident that second repeats are all pianoteq. With my modest headphones (Sony MDR-V6) it's even more obvious.

From my mp3 testing days, I know that different people are differently affected by mp3 artifacts. Some might find a specific artifact very objectionable and not others--and vice versa. To me, the synthetic attack of Pianoteq always bothered me, and therefore very easy to identify.

I hope one day Pianoteq will sound perfect. They are making progress, but they are not there today.

Re: Acoustic Steinway Model B vs Pianoteq Model B [Re: toddy] #2757689 08/11/18 02:22 PM
Joined: Jun 2014
Posts: 1,445
A
Alexander Borro Offline
1000 Post Club Member
Offline
1000 Post Club Member
A
Joined: Jun 2014
Posts: 1,445
Originally Posted by toddy

Overall, Pianoteq is remarkable. Playing it, you get the feeling of authenticity and character for some passages, only to come back to the synthetic-poor-approximation impression in the next moment. Certain dynamic levels, certain regions of the keyboard, still betray its nature.


For me one of those worse case moments is right there at @28 secs, it's sooooo pianoteq and a not real moment, personally I don't think it is just the attack, it is the actual timbre, the notes in the right hand at that point are for me a dead giveaway, and there is a thinness too in those notes, the metal is sorta there, but the wood and body is not coming through in the pteq model B in those notes,

I like the grotrian and steingraber a bit better for that.

While it may sound like a very derogatory thing to say towards pteq, I mean I do like it at times, but it at that moment where literally the term toy piano comes to mind, it's the thin metallic like timbre (at higher dynamics in particular), and not very grand like, but more like a tiny upright in terms of tone body as if it had a tiny soundboard or something.

Even the steinway O models I have tried in the flesh, much smaller than the B , has much more body than that in those notes.


Selftaught since June 2014.
Books: Barratt classic piano course bk 1,2,3. Humphries Piano handbook, various...
Kawai CA78, Casio AP450 & software pianos.
[Linked Image] 12x ABF recitals.
My struggles: https://soundcloud.com/alexander-borro
Re: Acoustic Steinway Model B vs Pianoteq Model B [Re: JoeT] #2757694 08/11/18 02:30 PM
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 310
S
stamkorg Offline
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
S
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by JoeT
Originally Posted by stamkorg
except the Garritan CFX, which sampled piano has no flaws with velocity jumps, pedaling, noises...?

Yamaha, Kawai and older Roland?


Yes of course, I was speaking about software instuments

Re: Acoustic Steinway Model B vs Pianoteq Model B [Re: lophiomys] #2757697 08/11/18 02:37 PM
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,431
CyberGene Offline
4000 Post Club Member
Offline
4000 Post Club Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,431
Originally Posted by lophiomys

Exactly that was not more than a vague guess by forumite Cybergene. And quickly it is spreading out. FUD is working really well.

For example, if you train a model (e.g. a physics formula with many, many parameters) with the desired output data (e.g. a sound sample of an accoustic grand), in order to find the right set of configuration paramters, it remains still a configurable physical model and would "not be based on recored samples", as a looping ROMpler would be.


I wrote a P.S. yesterday which I am afraid you missed and I believe I am in my rights to post again here:

Quote
P.S. You're also quoting me wrong. I didn't say I have "no time". I said I didn't have enough time for detailed review but I still had time to go through the patent. And I didn't say I have "no knowledge". I said it requires mathematical knowledge. I have a degree in physics and have had many separate mathematics course including calculus, differential equations, computational physics, numerical analysis. I haven't practiced that so I am no the best at understanding that in a blink but it's far from "no knowledge" which I didn't say.


I feel the need to repeat that quote because there's this feeling I got my statement out of thin air, whereas in fact I have a master degree in Physics and used to be very well versed in comprehending matter such as the one presented in the patent. Yes, I haven't practiced physics ever since I graduated and yes, I didn't have a whole day to read the patent. However I read it in its entirety in about 30 minutes and I've just read it once more today.

On my second read I noticed something even more intriguing and its about attack sounds actually being prerecorded (what they refer as percussive sample being interpolated with the synthesis). I still stick to my initial understanding. Although they haven't directly stated they used real recorded samples, it is my understanding that their way of synthesis is just summing sine functions representing the partials with varying damping coefficients. And they provide tables with those coefficients. Whether they have obtained those tables through direct pre-analysis of recorded samples in their labs or by any other means (like preparing them by ear?) isn't presented in the paper which us understandable.

The modeled part of the patent is about being able to influence the partial coefficients in a way that corresponds to changing various parameters of the string and the soundboard. Furthermore, for the soundboard it seems they most probably use waveguide synthesis, i.e. digital delay filters.

I would agree that being able to change string and soundboard parameters is already some kind of modeling but I would insist that it's not what I expect by modeling, namely solving differential equations describing the piano as a model which I doubt would soon be practically possible, especially in realtime.

I would like once again to clarify that I haven't stated anywhere Pianoteq is sampled. What I mean is the sound synthesis engine in Pianoteq is one which cleverly represents the piano sound by sine function sums whose damping and other coefficients, including string excitation (sympathetic string resonance), etc. is coming from pre-calculated tables and the modeling part realized by affecting those coefficients in real time.

And finally, I might be wrong because patents are often intentionally written in vague terms that are very difficult to comprehend unless one is experienced in that.

Last edited by CyberGene; 08/11/18 02:41 PM.

My YouTube, My Soundcloud
Currently: Yamaha N1X, DIY hybrid controller -> Garritan CFX
Previously: NU1X, ES7, MP6, CA63, RD-700SX, CDP-100, FP-5, P90, SP-200
Re: Acoustic Steinway Model B vs Pianoteq Model B [Re: CyberGene] #2757723 08/11/18 05:14 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 9,850
MacMacMac Offline
9000 Post Club Member
Offline
9000 Post Club Member
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 9,850
CG: It sounds like the Pianoteq guys did a LOT of work.
Originally Posted by CyberGene
The modeled part of the patent is about being able to influence the partial coefficients in a way that corresponds to changing various parameters of the string and the soundboard. Furthermore, for the soundboard it seems they most probably use waveguide synthesis, i.e. digital delay filters. ...
Now if only they could redirect that work into making it sound like a piano.

Re: Acoustic Steinway Model B vs Pianoteq Model B [Re: mcoll] #2757751 08/11/18 07:20 PM
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 625
E
EPW Offline
500 Post Club Member
Offline
500 Post Club Member
E
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 625
Oh!!!! Such a ruff tough crowd smile

I will take it Pianoteq in its present form. Still sounds way better then my Aunt Irene's old upright piano smile


All these years playing and I still consider myself a novice.
Re: Acoustic Steinway Model B vs Pianoteq Model B [Re: EPW] #2757762 08/11/18 08:31 PM
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 198
F
Fleer Offline
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
F
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 198
Yep. And that Steingräber is simply wonderful.

Re: Acoustic Steinway Model B vs Pianoteq Model B [Re: mcoll] #2757774 08/11/18 10:04 PM
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 625
E
EPW Offline
500 Post Club Member
Offline
500 Post Club Member
E
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 625
Upgraded to version 6 haven't upgraded to new Steingeaber yet


All these years playing and I still consider myself a novice.
Re: Acoustic Steinway Model B vs Pianoteq Model B [Re: mcoll] #2849476 05/18/19 03:28 AM
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 5
G
Gibraltar Offline
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
G
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 5
Some other recordings with Pianoteq Steinway Model B.






Re: Acoustic Steinway Model B vs Pianoteq Model B [Re: mcoll] #2849507 05/18/19 06:44 AM
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 175
B
BigIslandGuy Offline
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
B
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 175
I have a very good specimen of an S&S B and Pianoteq's B simulation. I can always tell the difference, but for the purpose of silent practice, Pianoteq in combo with a good MIDI controller is entirely adequate for me. Pianoteq required a fair amount of careful adjustment to get the sound where I like it, but, again, it works for me.

Re: Acoustic Steinway Model B vs Pianoteq Model B [Re: BigIslandGuy] #2849513 05/18/19 07:08 AM
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 8,344
Tyrone Slothrop Online Content
8000 Post Club Member
Online Content
8000 Post Club Member
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 8,344
Originally Posted by BigIslandGuy
I have a very good specimen of an S&S B and Pianoteq's B simulation. I can always tell the difference, but for the purpose of silent practice, Pianoteq in combo with a good MIDI controller is entirely adequate for me. Pianoteq required a fair amount of careful adjustment to get the sound where I like it, but, again, it works for me.

Have you tried the new release, 6.5, yet? They haven't revoiced the B, but they did change the hammer attack.


across the stone, deathless piano performances

"Discipline is more reliable than motivation." -by a contributor on Reddit r/piano
"Success is 10% inspiration, and 90% perspiration." -by some other wise person
"Pianoteq manages to keep it all together yet simultaneously also go in all directions; like a quantum particle entangled with an unknown and spooky parallel universe simply waiting to be discovered." -by Pete14
Re: Acoustic Steinway Model B vs Pianoteq Model B [Re: Tyrone Slothrop] #2849593 05/18/19 10:47 AM
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 175
B
BigIslandGuy Offline
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
B
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 175
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Originally Posted by BigIslandGuy
I have a very good specimen of an S&S B and Pianoteq's B simulation. I can always tell the difference, but for the purpose of silent practice, Pianoteq in combo with a good MIDI controller is entirely adequate for me. Pianoteq required a fair amount of careful adjustment to get the sound where I like it, but, again, it works for me.

Have you tried the new release, 6.5, yet? They haven't revoiced the B, but they did change the hammer attack.

I haven't had a chance to download the latest - in fact I didn't even realize they had released a new update until I was reading around here on PW. I'll give it a whirl later today and get back to you on this.

Re: Acoustic Steinway Model B vs Pianoteq Model B [Re: mcoll] #2849664 05/18/19 01:27 PM
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 7,896
peterws Offline
7000 Post Club Member
Offline
7000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 7,896
Listening to the recording, I wasn't bothered which was real or virtual. They were both uncannily almost the same. Well good enough for the likes of me.
This would be an even better posting if other instruments were involved, then we'd see the difference in character.


"I am not a man. I am a free number"

"[Linked Image]"
Re: Acoustic Steinway Model B vs Pianoteq Model B [Re: mcoll] #2852596 05/27/19 04:00 AM
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 5
G
Gibraltar Offline
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
G
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 5
Another wonderful recording of my French friends with the Pianoteq Steinway B.

Piano Sonata in D Major, K. 284 - 1. Allegro

https://soundcloud.com/piano-talents-series/mozart-sonata-in-d-major-k-284-1-allegro-stephane-salort

Piano Sonata in D Major, K. 284 - 2. Rondeau en Polonaise

https://soundcloud.com/piano-talent...4-2-rondeau-en-polonaise-stephane-salort

Piano Sonata in D Major, K. 284 - 3. Tema con variazioni

https://soundcloud.com/piano-talent...84-3-tema-con-variazioni-stephane-salort

Last edited by Gibraltar; 05/27/19 04:03 AM.
Re: Acoustic Steinway Model B vs Pianoteq Model B [Re: mcoll] #2852634 05/27/19 07:30 AM
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,431
CyberGene Offline
4000 Post Club Member
Offline
4000 Post Club Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,431
The above samples approach the slightly hollow and thin timbre of the historical fortepiano pretty well, although I personally don't like the sound of real fortepianos. But I would be hard pressed to distinguish between that Pianoteq recording and a real historical fortepiano as I've heard them on HIP recordings.

Last edited by CyberGene; 05/27/19 07:32 AM.

My YouTube, My Soundcloud
Currently: Yamaha N1X, DIY hybrid controller -> Garritan CFX
Previously: NU1X, ES7, MP6, CA63, RD-700SX, CDP-100, FP-5, P90, SP-200
Page 4 of 5 1 2 3 4 5

Moderated by  Piano World 

(ad)
Pianoteq
PianoTeq Bechstein
Shop our Store for Music Lovers!
PianoSupplies.com is Piano World's Online Store
Please visit our store today.
(ad)
Faust Harrison Pianos
Faust Harrison 100+ Steinway pianos
New Topics - Multiple Forums
Dampers on a Yamaha upright
by JuanTenorio - 12/06/19 08:44 PM
Another mental health thread: What if....
by malkin - 12/06/19 08:43 PM
Telecom Beethoven Competition
by pianoloverus - 12/06/19 08:36 PM
Note reading: low to high?
by DutchTea - 12/06/19 07:38 PM
Chopin 10/8 —Do I have idiots ffor fingers
by Coda9 - 12/06/19 07:03 PM
What's Hot!!
Our August Newsletter is Out!
------------------
Mason & Hamlin Piano Factory Tour!

-------------------
Posting Pictures on the Forums
-------------------
Forums RULES & HELP
-------------------
ADVERTISE on Piano World
Forum Statistics
Forums41
Topics195,538
Posts2,899,233
Members95,167
Most Online15,252
Mar 21st, 2010
Please Support Our Advertisers


Faust Harrison 100+ Steinways

Dampp Chaser Piano Life Saver

 Best of Piano Buyer

PianoTeq Bechstein
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 - 2019 Piano World ® all rights reserved
No part of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.3