Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards Beautiful, playable VSTs

Hi all,

I have recently purchased a Casio Grand Hybrid which I have been using exclusively as a MIDi controller, in collaboration with my laptop. Pianoteq’s Bechstein Digital Grand is my go to instrument, but I also own the actual Bechstein Digital Grand. Interestingly enough I can’t get the latter to sound anywhere near as good as Pianoteq... it just sounds very thin.

Firstly, is anyone else using the Bechstein DG and if so what settings do you use, to make it sound believable?

Secondly what other great VSTs are there that would be recommended for someone who primarily wants to play and not record? I do own imperfect samples Walnut Grand, which again, just isn’t doing it for me!

I like the Galaxy Vintage D and The Grandeur. Both are Steinways.
Lots of people here like the Garritan Yamaha CFX.

Have a look at the many threads on the subject.
This online spreadsheet might help you search for threads on this sort of topic.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_ax7Q3Bn4Zmm1ZHjeD4zLxbpCX8y5cQw/view

Are you dissatisfied with Pianoteq in any way?

There are only two I would recommend: Garritan CFX and VSL Concert D-274. Personally, VSL Concert D-274 has been my favorite lately.

Osho

I recommend Embertone Walker 1955. Make sure you have a fast pc (especially cpu) tough, because it is quite demanding of cpu power. My I5 4570 has a hard time with it, Ill have to upgrade if I want to use more than one mic position simultaneously, and mixing mic positions sounds incredible with this vst.

I recommend Piano Noire by Native Instruments.

Best Demo here (Noire vs Ravenscroft vs Keyscape)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2G0xMRdjDM
Noire vs Garritan:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANwDPfLnmi8&t=118s

Did you try it with a fast pc? If not, I don't see any reason to recommend it as a playable VST.

Why not? My at least 5 year old pc handles it reasonably well with one mic position, and aside from the high cpu demand of this vst I am having a blast with this amazing sounding library, for me, playing garritan ctx, ravenscroft, or synthogy's American d didn't nearly give me such a realistic feeling playing experience, so in my opinion, it is very much worth recommending it, and op top of that my recommendation included recommending a fast cpu.

My 3 years old computer does not handle Embertone Walker reasonably well even with a single mic when I apply the sustain pedal. Without the pedal yes, this is a beautifully sounding VSTi.

I had a listen to the Embertone Walker tracks Emberton has made available on Soundcloud. I was a bit disappointed. I think perhaps it is a VST that isn't for everyone.

https://soundcloud.com/embertone/sets/walker-1955-concert-d

You probably play more complicated/faster/more demanding pieces than me. But i do agree, it is quite the cpu hog when applying the sustain pedal, and I do too have cpu overload problems sometimes. The strange thing is using multiple mic positions doesn't seem to make the problem that much worse.

BUT... if i put the sample frequency on 44100, cpu problems are gone, and I can even use multiple mic positions without problems.

I don't want to lose audio quality tough, and I like this vst alot so I'm thinking about upgrading my motherboard + cpu, or something like that.

I have a reasonably fast PC - and have had no issues with at least 5 other VSTs I have tried (including Garritan CFX, VSL Synchron D-274, Ravenscroft 275 etc.). But, I always have issues with live playing on Emeberton Walker 1955 with 2 mics. I have tried all the tricks mentioned in Pianoworld and Vi Control board to make it usable - but it has been frustrating.

It is really unfortunate as I love the sound of Embertone Walker 1955. So, I will use it for rendering midi - but will not recommend it for live playing.

Osho

Hm.. yes that is unfortunate. What cpu do you have? I also have had no real issues with other vst's on my mid-aged pc, well except for garritan cfx which started to crackle after a while because of it's memory leak. But that was back when i had 8gb of ram, I added another 8gb, but haven't really played the cfx anymore since i got synthogy's American d and now emberrtone's walker.

I think a new mid-range or better PC will play most any VST.
Then time goes by. The old VSTs work fine. But the new bigger better beefier ones don't.

No matter how big your pool ... you'll find yourself with enough visitors to fill it to capacity.
And then you buy a bigger pool.

My ‘pool’ is the Hudson River; so no, I don’t see it filling to capacity anytime soon!

I'm curious to know why going above 44.1KHz should make a difference in audio playing, considering it's scientifically proven (Nyquist theorem) that with that frequency rate you can perfectly reproduce up to 22050 Hz frequencies, and considering that an adult doesn't hear so much above the 16KHz, I think playing an audio signal, for example, at 96KHz is completely and utterly useless (at least for an human ear)...
IMHO those high sampling rates are useful just for purposes of master recording and editing. If I record a sample at 96KHz, then I can "manipulate" that sample (i.e. playing it slowly than its original frequency rate) without losing significant quality. That's all.

Yes, higher than 44100 is useful for editing. But you don’t need higher than that for just replaying samples. Save your money

Really, well that is interesting.

I thought I was hearing a "less full" sound when i put in on 44100, but that's possibly just between the ears then.

Well, in my enthousiasm I just tested this again when i got home from work (yes i still work) and it turns out that unfortunately you guys were wrong about this one. The piano definitly sounds less impressive at 44100 compared to 96000, or my mind is playing massive tricks on me.

Or ... there's an uncontrolled variable.