2017 was our 20th year online!

Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums
Over 3 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments.
Over 100,000 members from around the world.
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers (it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

Shop our online store for music lovers
SEARCH
Piano Forums & Piano World
(ad)
Best of Piano Buyer
 Best of Piano Buyer
(ad)
Faust Harrison Pianos
Faust Harrison 100+ Steinway pianos
(ad)
Wessell Nickel & Gross
PianoForAll
Who's Online Now
48 members (beeboss, Anglagard44, barbaram, Calavera, clothearednincompo, CraiginNZ, 8opus, 12 invisible), 1,356 guests, and 466 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
(ad)
Estonia Pianos
Estonia Pianos
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 1,249
A
1000 Post Club Member
Offline
1000 Post Club Member
A
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 1,249
Originally Posted by _sem_
Most virtual pianos are currently not available on Ipads.
https://apps.apple.com/us/app/ravenscroft-275-piano/id966586407

I own an iPad Pro and it's very convenient to connect and disconnect devices to it. I also have a touch screen that I can touch and modify.

Originally Posted by anotherscott
Originally Posted by Tom Fort
The iPad Pros are powerful enough to run the most challenging software instruments.
Memory management is different. Piano VSTs typically stream from storage, and that capability seems to be more limited in iOS. I believe the only piano app that streams off storage is Colossus, I don't know what they're doing that no one else seems to be able to do, though there is a trade-off as load time (or changing instruments) takes quite a while.

ETA: An obvious example of how memory is handled differently: Mac apps almost never crash... if they need more memory, they can just keep swapping stuff in and out of RAM, you basically can't run out unless your disk is full. But when an iOS app runs out of memory, it simply aborts, even if you have plenty of free storage space. This different memory management is at least one reason that things that can work fine on a Mac may not be feasible (yet?) on an iPad.

iPad Pro, is quite a powerhouse due to its architecture. You can edit 4k videos on it without the above-mentioned issues.

Garageband has some nice AU-Plugins e.g. Alchemy but it's nowhere near what you can get on a PC for obvious reasons: iPad is a luxury device and not many companies are willing to invest in a platform with a limited user-base.


Cubasis works exclusively on iPad and there are some really nice plug-ins from Korg that work on iPad. With the introduction of M1 chip, there is a high chance that many apps can be ported directly to iOS platform.


Kawai MP7SE, Yamaha MOTF XF6, Yamaha WX5, Yamaha Pacifica 112v
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,743
E
EPW Offline
1000 Post Club Member
Offline
1000 Post Club Member
E
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,743
To me it would depend on the cost. If I have to re-buy my VSTi's then I think I would stick with a 2n1 or a Surface Pro model. As an example. Staffpad has to be brought separately for each platform at $89.00.
That can add up for all of your purchases.


All these years playing and I still consider myself a novice.
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 811
D
500 Post Club Member
Offline
500 Post Club Member
D
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 811
A few remarks.

1. Porting software to Ipad after Apple Silicon Mac is no easier than before, the new Universal app don't run on Ipad and creating iPad apps is much more complex (compared to just recompile for the most par to make it universal) and has not changed at all. So don't expect any improvements on this front coming from Apple Silicon Macs (unless MacOS comes to iPad which is highly unlikely)

2. Porting to iPad is not just a matter of coding, it's also making the interface touch friendly, which is an additional work that can time quite some time and effort for complex interfaces

3. Once it's done it's not just a matter of replying to reviews, the app news to be maintained (bugs fixed) and updated regularly

4 The only 2 desktop libraries currently on iPad have much simplified interfaces (much less options), and while for Ravenscrof VI Labs made a dedidcated app, Synthogy just had to port they sound library, since Korg took care of making the interface and the engine. Also samples are much smaller (Ivory is 1 to 2 GB per instrument, Ravenscroft is 850MB).For Ivory sound quality is the same, but probably the number of velocity is heavily reduced and samples are half as long. Ravenscroft does not sound as good as desktop even if it's close. And probably less velocities too. Both cost roughly 1/5 of the full price.

5 For Modartt it would be quite an investment to make a iPad app and I don't see the incentive if they cannot charge for it. While people don't like to pay again to have the same piano on a different platform, that's only fair.... And by the way, and this is just my opinion, they have the right to charge full price for it...just like on desktop. And remember if they charge exactly like on desktop they still earn 30% less because of the Apple's cut...

6. Concerning "would people buy it apps at $100 to $200?" I think some current client of pianoteq would. It's something very differnt when you have an expensive app (e.g. Colossus) that only exist on iIPad and you want people to pay $50 to test it and when you already have a desktop version (like I have for Ravenscroft and Ivory) that clients already know and use and want to buy them for iPad. So yes, Modartt already have their clients if they decide to take the jump...(but I am skeptikal that they will do it anytime soon...)


Roland FP-4F, Korg Kross 61, iRig Keys Pro, HD58X, HD598, Focal Spirit Pro, Shure SRH240A, RME Babyface, M-Track Plus, Roland DuoCapture, Presonus Eris E5, iLoud micro monitors, iPad Pro, HP Elite X2, Ivory II ACD, Korg Module for iPad, Garrital CFX full, Vienna Imperial, Ravenscroft, Kawai-Ex Pro
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 6,039
A
6000 Post Club Member
Offline
6000 Post Club Member
A
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 6,039
Originally Posted by Digitalguy
And remember if they charge exactly like on desktop they still earn 30% less because of the Apple's cut...
though a comparable amount probably also goes to any 3rd-party vendor who sells their current products (Sweetwater, etc.)

Originally Posted by Digitalguy
6. Concerning "would people buy it apps at $100 to $200?" I think some current client of pianoteq would. It's something very differnt when you have an expensive app (e.g. Colossus) that only exist on iIPad and you want people to pay $50 to test it and when you already have a desktop version (like I have for Ravenscroft and Ivory) that clients already know and use and want to buy them for iPad.
at least from discussions online, it seems like people have been plenty willing to buy the B-3X organ app which has typically been selling for $130. Though similar to what you're talking about there, people can download a demo of their PC/Mac version to kind of test it out first. Sound is the same.

Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 811
D
500 Post Club Member
Offline
500 Post Club Member
D
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 811
Originally Posted by anotherscott
Originally Posted by Digitalguy
And remember if they charge exactly like on desktop they still earn 30% less because of the Apple's cut...
though a comparable amount probably also goes to any 3rd-party vendor who sells their current products (Sweetwater, etc.)

Originally Posted by Digitalguy
6. Concerning "would people buy it apps at $100 to $200?" I think some current client of pianoteq would. It's something very differnt when you have an expensive app (e.g. Colossus) that only exist on iIPad and you want people to pay $50 to test it and when you already have a desktop version (like I have for Ravenscroft and Ivory) that clients already know and use and want to buy them for iPad.
at least from discussions online, it seems like people have been plenty willing to buy the B-3X organ app which has typically been selling for $130. Though similar to what you're talking about there, people can download a demo of their PC/Mac version to kind of test it out first. Sound is the same.

Hi Scott, yeah sure, but I guess a lot of people buy directly from their website while they can only sell IOS apps through the store...
By the way, I forgot to answer your question above. I haven't tried Colossus, for the reason I said in point 6. In my experience, iPad only piano apps are not good enough and by the way I bought my first iPad (air) 7 years ago also because of their piano app CMP. At that time I wanted a tablet that I could put on my music rest, read my sheet music and play piano from it. It was decent back then, but nowhere near desktop apps. So no, I don't trust them to do much better, and definitely not as good as Ravenscroft, let alone Ivory...(which are both cheaper and often on sale, got them all half price...).
I think pro apps deserve pro prices and should not come for free for those that have the desktop version. I was glad to pay for Ivory again and I would have paid even it it was the desktop price. When they did I was like, just 30 bucks? Why so cheap? Not everyone likes it, but it's my favorite piano. I have 3-4 favorites and a couple of "less favorite but still good" that I use every now and then. Ivory American is n. 1. Garritan CFX, Ivory German are the other favorites. If CFX comes to the iPad, I'll pay full price again. Pianoteq needs to improve more before I put my money on it...And my "play every now and then" are Ravenscroft, kawai ex pro, BechStein digital grand, The Grandeur and last and least, Vienna Imperial (these are apps I would only buy at $10-20 because even if I spend several hundrend dollars on them in the past their are not worth more to me...). If Pianoteq improves enough I can pay $200 or more no problem to have it on iPad...


Roland FP-4F, Korg Kross 61, iRig Keys Pro, HD58X, HD598, Focal Spirit Pro, Shure SRH240A, RME Babyface, M-Track Plus, Roland DuoCapture, Presonus Eris E5, iLoud micro monitors, iPad Pro, HP Elite X2, Ivory II ACD, Korg Module for iPad, Garrital CFX full, Vienna Imperial, Ravenscroft, Kawai-Ex Pro
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 225
T
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
T
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 225
Originally Posted by Digitalguy
A few remarks.

1. Porting software to Ipad after Apple Silicon Mac is no easier than before, the new Universal app don't run on Ipad and creating iPad apps is much more complex (compared to just recompile for the most par to make it universal) and has not changed at all. So don't expect any improvements on this front coming from Apple Silicon Macs (unless MacOS comes to iPad which is highly unlikely)

Are you a developer? If so, I'd love to hear more details. I'm not, but from what I've read (and knowing that Apple Silicon MacOS and iOS are very similar), I think it's a good bit easier than before, especially for programs that have been properly following Apple's software development and UI design guidelines and using their APIs.


Originally Posted by Digitalguy
2. Porting to iPad is not just a matter of coding, it's also making the interface touch friendly, which is an additional work that can time quite some time and effort for complex interfaces
Again, I am not a programmer, but I have read that Apple's made it fairly easy to make it work, if you use their development tools and APIs properly. If you use a lot of custom UI elements, then yes it'd be a good bit more difficult. But still, to have access to the larger market, wouldn't you make the effort?


Originally Posted by Digitalguy
3. Once it's done it's not just a matter of replying to reviews, the app news to be maintained (bugs fixed) and updated regularly
I guess how hard that would be depends on how much code is shared. Pianoteq is already maintaining an ARM version for a few (?) dedicated Linux users, and their development platform, JUCE, supports it. A bit more effort to reach iPad and iPhone users seems like a pretty good return on investment.


Originally Posted by Digitalguy
4 The only 2 desktop libraries currently on iPad have much simplified interfaces (much less options), and while for Ravenscrof VI Labs made a dedidcated app, Synthogy just had to port they sound library, since Korg took care of making the interface and the engine. Also samples are much smaller (Ivory is 1 to 2 GB per instrument, Ravenscroft is 850MB).For Ivory sound quality is the same, but probably the number of velocity is heavily reduced and samples are half as long. Ravenscroft does not sound as good as desktop even if it's close. And probably less velocities too. Both cost roughly 1/5 of the full price.
I fully agree with you here. These were designed, I think, when iPads had less powerful processors and less storage available. Prior to the 2018 iPad Pro, I don't think you could say that iPads and iPhones were capable of running virtually any VST. Now, I think even the iPhone SE could do it. Pianoteq requires very few resources, though.


Originally Posted by Digitalguy
5 For Modartt it would be quite an investment to make a iPad app and I don't see the incentive if they cannot charge for it. While people don't like to pay again to have the same piano on a different platform, that's only fair.... And by the way, and this is just my opinion, they have the right to charge full price for it...just like on desktop. And remember if they charge exactly like on desktop they still earn 30% less because of the Apple's cut...
Again, how much more of an investment is it if they already maintain an ARM version? Modartt certainly has the right to charge full price for it; I just gave my thought as to where the sweet spot might be for them to really establish themselves as the iOS piano of choice (and to make the most money). Also, Apple is now allowing developers to enroll in a program which begins on Jan 1 which would charge all but the very biggest devs only 15% commission.


Originally Posted by Digitalguy
6. Concerning "would people buy it apps at $100 to $200?" I think some current client of pianoteq would. It's something very differnt when you have an expensive app (e.g. Colossus) that only exist on iIPad and you want people to pay $50 to test it and when you already have a desktop version (like I have for Ravenscroft and Ivory) that clients already know and use and want to buy them for iPad. So yes, Modartt already have their clients if they decide to take the jump...(but I am skeptikal that they will do it anytime soon...)
I personally don't see a market for software on iOS that costs over $100, unless you are using it to make money. There would be some enthusiasts and hobbyists who would pay that much, but would that hit the sweet spot on the demand curve for Modartt? I think pricing on all software, pc and mobile, is trending downward for good. I think of all the synths I have on iOS which I almost never use, they were cheap enough that they were impulse buys. All of them cost <$20, most <$10. For me to spend $50, I'd have to be using it a lot, every week at least. To spend $100+ on it? It would have to be my primary/daily hobby or I'd have to be a gigging musician.


Not trying to be combative here, I appreciate the discussion. It's a new era for devs coming to the mobile software world, and there is no established "best" formula for pricing strategy. It's better to see that uncertainty as an opportunity to innovate than a liability, imo.

Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 6,039
A
6000 Post Club Member
Offline
6000 Post Club Member
A
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 6,039
Originally Posted by Tom Fort
I personally don't see a market for software on iOS that costs over $100, unless you are using it to make money. There would be some enthusiasts and hobbyists who would pay that much, but would that hit the sweet spot on the demand curve for Modartt? I think pricing on all software, pc and mobile, is trending downward for good. I think of all the synths I have on iOS which I almost never use, they were cheap enough that they were impulse buys. All of them cost <$20, most <$10. For me to spend $50, I'd have to be using it a lot, every week at least. To spend $100+ on it? It would have to be my primary/daily hobby or I'd have to be a gigging musician.
It's true that, as a rule, iOS is geared toward impulse buys. Stuff where, if you end up not using it, you won't be too broken up about it. But that doesn't mean that's the only way to sell. If Pianoteq is worth $150 on a PC, why would the identical capabilities on an iPad not be worth the identical $150? I'm not saying it SHOULD be $150.... and in fact, they could conceivably sell 10x as many at $25 and come out ahead, everyone wins. That would be something for them to consider. But from the consumer side, if something is worth $x for you to have, it should be worth $x for you to have regardless of the underlying platform. With this possible exception: VSTs often permit a transfer of license (for free or a small fee), meaning you can get some your investment back if you no longer need it, and that's not available on iOS, where it is always a completely sunk cost.

Joined: Sep 2018
Posts: 639
I
500 Post Club Member
Offline
500 Post Club Member
I
Joined: Sep 2018
Posts: 639
I think if you could get an equivalent VST piano like those preferred here on the iPad there would be a corresponding market that would pay full price to get them. It’s a lot easier and more fun to mess with stuff on an iPad, IMO. Especially since you can just put it on the music stand.


Jazz at www.newartistsrecords.com. Search Michael Levy. Use Safari for free tracks.
https://soundcloud.com/michael-levy-387395070 for jazz, classical, world, rock tracks Albums on Bandcamp: https://michaelalevy.bandcamp.com/music
Kawai ES8, Casio PXS3000
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 811
D
500 Post Club Member
Offline
500 Post Club Member
D
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 811
Originally Posted by Tom Fort
Originally Posted by Digitalguy
A few remarks.

1. Porting software to Ipad after Apple Silicon Mac is no easier than before, the new Universal app don't run on Ipad and creating iPad apps is much more complex (compared to just recompile for the most par to make it universal) and has not changed at all. So don't expect any improvements on this front coming from Apple Silicon Macs (unless MacOS comes to iPad which is highly unlikely)

Are you a developer? If so, I'd love to hear more details. I'm not, but from what I've read (and knowing that Apple Silicon MacOS and iOS are very similar), I think it's a good bit easier than before, especially for programs that have been properly following Apple's software development and UI design guidelines and using their APIs.


Originally Posted by Digitalguy
2. Porting to iPad is not just a matter of coding, it's also making the interface touch friendly, which is an additional work that can time quite some time and effort for complex interfaces
Again, I am not a programmer, but I have read that Apple's made it fairly easy to make it work, if you use their development tools and APIs properly. If you use a lot of custom UI elements, then yes it'd be a good bit more difficult. But still, to have access to the larger market, wouldn't you make the effort?


Originally Posted by Digitalguy
3. Once it's done it's not just a matter of replying to reviews, the app news to be maintained (bugs fixed) and updated regularly
I guess how hard that would be depends on how much code is shared. Pianoteq is already maintaining an ARM version for a few (?) dedicated Linux users, and their development platform, JUCE, supports it. A bit more effort to reach iPad and iPhone users seems like a pretty good return on investment.

I am not a developer but I have discussed this with developers that work both on mobile and desktop platforms, including the new Apple Silicon. The big misconception is "since it's ARM, it must be similar". Well, no. It's like saying since it's Android, it's easy to port to IOS. MacOS and i(Pad)OS are completely different platforms and the fact that mobile apps run on desktop does not make the reverse true, at all, unless Apple decides to either make MacOS run iPads or make a MacOS mode on iPads. As it stands now, Universal binaries are completely different from IpadOS apps and don't run at all on mobile platforms. So no, it's not even a tiny bit easier than before, again unless Apple decides to make it possible to run MacOS on iPads (which is highly unlikely, as it goes against their interest of selling both Mac and iPads to the same clients). What Apple has made easy is recompile x86 Macs software to Universal binaries, not to port them to iPadOS. Again, it's not a bit more effort, it's a different OS, different platform, same work as before the transition... Hope it's more clear now.
Pianoteq has a much more complex interface if you compare to what is offered on iPad now. Korg has one of the most complex interface (and again it's Korg, working with many piano companies, not just a single company) but Pianoteq is much more complex, let alone the fact that it should be made touch friendly...

Originally Posted by Tom Fort
Originally Posted by Digitalguy
4 The only 2 desktop libraries currently on iPad have much simplified interfaces (much less options), and while for Ravenscrof VI Labs made a dedidcated app, Synthogy just had to port they sound library, since Korg took care of making the interface and the engine. Also samples are much smaller (Ivory is 1 to 2 GB per instrument, Ravenscroft is 850MB).For Ivory sound quality is the same, but probably the number of velocity is heavily reduced and samples are half as long. Ravenscroft does not sound as good as desktop even if it's close. And probably less velocities too. Both cost roughly 1/5 of the full price.
I fully agree with you here. These were designed, I think, when iPads had less powerful processors and less storage available. Prior to the 2018 iPad Pro, I don't think you could say that iPads and iPhones were capable of running virtually any VST. Now, I think even the iPhone SE could do it. Pianoteq requires very few resources, though.

Korg module was originally made for IOS 8 and is so well optimized that it can run even on an old iPad 2, granted, with minimum polyphony of 32 and buffer size of at least 256 but it's amazing that it runs... Even an ipad air 2, the best iPad back then, can run it at full specs (64 sample size and 112 voices) with no issues. Anyway speed is not a issue on ipad anymore. Even the basic Ipad is faster than most Intel i5 and many intel i7 (especially dual core chips). RAM may be an issue but developers can set limits. For instance, they can exclude 2GB devices, limit the sample size on 3GB devices and allow best performance on 6GB devices, etc.

Originally Posted by Tom Fort
Originally Posted by Digitalguy
5 For Modartt it would be quite an investment to make a iPad app and I don't see the incentive if they cannot charge for it. While people don't like to pay again to have the same piano on a different platform, that's only fair.... And by the way, and this is just my opinion, they have the right to charge full price for it...just like on desktop. And remember if they charge exactly like on desktop they still earn 30% less because of the Apple's cut...
Again, how much more of an investment is it if they already maintain an ARM version? Modartt certainly has the right to charge full price for it; I just gave my thought as to where the sweet spot might be for them to really establish themselves as the iOS piano of choice (and to make the most money). Also, Apple is now allowing developers to enroll in a program which begins on Jan 1 which would charge all but the very biggest devs only 15% commission.


Originally Posted by Digitalguy
6. Concerning "would people buy it apps at $100 to $200?" I think some current client of pianoteq would. It's something very differnt when you have an expensive app (e.g. Colossus) that only exist on iIPad and you want people to pay $50 to test it and when you already have a desktop version (like I have for Ravenscroft and Ivory) that clients already know and use and want to buy them for iPad. So yes, Modartt already have their clients if they decide to take the jump...(but I am skeptikal that they will do it anytime soon...)
I personally don't see a market for software on iOS that costs over $100, unless you are using it to make money. There would be some enthusiasts and hobbyists who would pay that much, but would that hit the sweet spot on the demand curve for Modartt? I think pricing on all software, pc and mobile, is trending downward for good. I think of all the synths I have on iOS which I almost never use, they were cheap enough that they were impulse buys. All of them cost <$20, most <$10. For me to spend $50, I'd have to be using it a lot, every week at least. To spend $100+ on it? It would have to be my primary/daily hobby or I'd have to be a gigging musician.


Not trying to be combative here, I appreciate the discussion. It's a new era for devs coming to the mobile software world, and there is no established "best" formula for pricing strategy. It's better to see that uncertainty as an opportunity to innovate than a liability, imo.

I know about the 15% cut for developers under $1M, I have discussed this in various forums and it's welcome, hopefully it could motivate Modartt. I don't know the tecnicalities of their software, but my guess it's that it would be one of the most complex to port and to update given it's not just a sample library... It would probably require some full time developers.. Would their salary be worth the investment? I hope so... we'll see.... But again the main point is, Apple Silicon does not change anything at all for developers, other that the (very remote) possibility for Apple to allow iPads to run MacOS one day...


Roland FP-4F, Korg Kross 61, iRig Keys Pro, HD58X, HD598, Focal Spirit Pro, Shure SRH240A, RME Babyface, M-Track Plus, Roland DuoCapture, Presonus Eris E5, iLoud micro monitors, iPad Pro, HP Elite X2, Ivory II ACD, Korg Module for iPad, Garrital CFX full, Vienna Imperial, Ravenscroft, Kawai-Ex Pro
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 3,419
3000 Post Club Member
Online Content
3000 Post Club Member
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 3,419
The M1 port can be complicated by some assembly code using SIMD instructions. But high level code (C, C++...) should remain the same. The iOS port - when the M1 Mac port has been done is mainly the graphical user interface which has to be adapted to a touch screen.


Yamaha CLP150, Bechstein Digital Grand, Garritan CFX, Ivory II pianos, Galaxy pianos, EWQL Pianos, Native-Instrument The Definitive Piano Collection, Soniccouture Hammersmith, Truekeys, Pianoteq
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 811
D
500 Post Club Member
Offline
500 Post Club Member
D
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 811
Originally Posted by Frédéric L
The M1 port can be complicated by some assembly code using SIMD instructions. But high level code (C, C++...) should remain the same. The iOS port - when the M1 Mac port has been done is mainly the graphical user interface which has to be adapted to a touch screen.

No. The port to Apple Silicon won't change anything compared to the previsous situation. They don't need to change the code to port to Apple Silicon, they just need to recompile in Xcode, except for some complex apps or apps written with old code. So if they wanted to port to iPad before, they could do it before just as easily or as diffuctly before and after the transition.


Roland FP-4F, Korg Kross 61, iRig Keys Pro, HD58X, HD598, Focal Spirit Pro, Shure SRH240A, RME Babyface, M-Track Plus, Roland DuoCapture, Presonus Eris E5, iLoud micro monitors, iPad Pro, HP Elite X2, Ivory II ACD, Korg Module for iPad, Garrital CFX full, Vienna Imperial, Ravenscroft, Kawai-Ex Pro
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 1,249
A
1000 Post Club Member
Offline
1000 Post Club Member
A
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 1,249
Originally Posted by Digitalguy
Originally Posted by Frédéric L
The M1 port can be complicated by some assembly code using SIMD instructions. But high level code (C, C++...) should remain the same. The iOS port - when the M1 Mac port has been done is mainly the graphical user interface which has to be adapted to a touch screen.

No. The port to Apple Silicon won't change anything compared to the previsous situation. They don't need to change the code to port to Apple Silicon, they just need to recompile in Xcode, except for some complex apps or apps written with old code. So if they wanted to port to iPad before, they could do it before just as easily or as diffuctly before and after the transition.

The porting to iOS will happen eventually. Regardless of the difficulty. SWAM has already done it and many more will follow. iPad pro is a pretty capable hardware:

[Linked Image]

[Linked Image]


I'd leave the technical discussion to the experienced developers.

No one likes to carry a funky chunky laptop around if you can do this:

[Linked Image]

Last edited by Abdol; 12/07/20 01:30 PM.

Kawai MP7SE, Yamaha MOTF XF6, Yamaha WX5, Yamaha Pacifica 112v
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 3,419
3000 Post Club Member
Online Content
3000 Post Club Member
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 3,419
Originally Posted by Digitalguy
Originally Posted by Frédéric L
The M1 port can be complicated by some assembly code using SIMD instructions. But high level code (C, C++...) should remain the same. The iOS port - when the M1 Mac port has been done is mainly the graphical user interface which has to be adapted to a touch screen.

No. The port to Apple Silicon won't change anything compared to the previsous situation. They don't need to change the code to port to Apple Silicon, they just need to recompile in Xcode, except for some complex apps or apps written with old code. So if they wanted to port to iPad before, they could do it before just as easily or as diffuctly before and after the transition.

I was referring to https://developer.apple.com/documen...itectural_differences_in_your_macos_code (Update Processor-Specific Vector Instructions)

It is possible that Pianoteq is optimized with SSE which is not portable (but can be shared between Intel Mac and Intel Windows). The proposition is to use the Accelerate framework... but we would have two codes (Mac and Windows).

Last edited by Frédéric L; 12/07/20 03:02 PM.

Yamaha CLP150, Bechstein Digital Grand, Garritan CFX, Ivory II pianos, Galaxy pianos, EWQL Pianos, Native-Instrument The Definitive Piano Collection, Soniccouture Hammersmith, Truekeys, Pianoteq
Joined: Oct 2019
Posts: 481
D
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
D
Joined: Oct 2019
Posts: 481
I have a Mac, a i7 PC, both hooked up to a very nice 32" monitor and 3 different pairs of studio monitors in my home studio, but after buying a 12.9" iPad Pro with 256gb, I have hardly gone into my studio.

I could argue all day long about the quality of the VSTs, the audio quality of the studio monitors or the 32" screen being better than the iPad but none of that matters. Even if the ipad is inferior in every way to what I have in my studio, its convenience allows me to enjoy making music outside of my studio and that's all that matters to me right now.

The OP said he REALLY, REALLY likes his iPad and doesn't want something else so I'm sharing my experience only to let him know he can enjoy learning/playing/recording music with an iPad Pro. I download B3X, Korg Module Pro and a few other music apps and have been very pleased. When I want to go back in the studio, it will be there.

Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 811
D
500 Post Club Member
Offline
500 Post Club Member
D
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 811
Originally Posted by Frédéric L
Originally Posted by Digitalguy
Originally Posted by Frédéric L
The M1 port can be complicated by some assembly code using SIMD instructions. But high level code (C, C++...) should remain the same. The iOS port - when the M1 Mac port has been done is mainly the graphical user interface which has to be adapted to a touch screen.

No. The port to Apple Silicon won't change anything compared to the previsous situation. They don't need to change the code to port to Apple Silicon, they just need to recompile in Xcode, except for some complex apps or apps written with old code. So if they wanted to port to iPad before, they could do it before just as easily or as diffuctly before and after the transition.

I was referring to https://developer.apple.com/documen...itectural_differences_in_your_macos_code (Update Processor-Specific Vector Instructions)

It is possible that Pianoteq is optimized with SSE which is not portable (but can be shared between Intel Mac and Intel Windows). The proposition is to use the Accelerate framework... but we would have two codes (Mac and Windows).

This does not make much difference.... Your said "when the M1 Mac port has been done is mainly the graphical user interface which has to be adapted to a touch screen", I read (unless I misinterpreted) like "once they port to Mac the big part of the work is done". And it's not. Will some developers have to change some of their code to adapt Apple Silicon? Yes, but most of the time it's minor, unless it's very complex apps. Will this help? Sure, but only modestly most of the time. So the port to Apple Silicon will change very little for most apps and developers. Even with Intel you could already write for both Mac and IOS with Swift, it's no different now. Most of the work is not writing for a different architecture, compilers will take car of talking to the different architecture for the most part, but writing for a different OS, in terms of how the OS reacts and what the OS can and cannot do and changing the UI elements to adapt to touch, this is the big part, and this has not changed with the transition to Apple Silicon.


Roland FP-4F, Korg Kross 61, iRig Keys Pro, HD58X, HD598, Focal Spirit Pro, Shure SRH240A, RME Babyface, M-Track Plus, Roland DuoCapture, Presonus Eris E5, iLoud micro monitors, iPad Pro, HP Elite X2, Ivory II ACD, Korg Module for iPad, Garrital CFX full, Vienna Imperial, Ravenscroft, Kawai-Ex Pro
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 811
D
500 Post Club Member
Offline
500 Post Club Member
D
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 811
Originally Posted by djvu10
I have a Mac, a i7 PC, both hooked up to a very nice 32" monitor and 3 different pairs of studio monitors in my home studio, but after buying a 12.9" iPad Pro with 256gb, I have hardly gone into my studio.

I could argue all day long about the quality of the VSTs, the audio quality of the studio monitors or the 32" screen being better than the iPad but none of that matters. Even if the ipad is inferior in every way to what I have in my studio, its convenience allows me to enjoy making music outside of my studio and that's all that matters to me right now.

The OP said he REALLY, REALLY likes his iPad and doesn't want something else so I'm sharing my experience only to let him know he can enjoy learning/playing/recording music with an iPad Pro. I download B3X, Korg Module Pro and a few other music apps and have been very pleased. When I want to go back in the studio, it will be there.

I have been a iPad supporter since the iPad air and especially the iPad pro in 2015. And since korg module in 2014 I have been playing more with my ipad than with my surface (and surface clones) devices. After all 2 of my favorite pianos were there. So I do hope more comes to the iPad. Recently I have switched back to a windows tablet most of the time because of Garritan CFX (I still play Ivory the most, but since I have all my best pianos on Windows I tend to use that instead). iPad does not lack power tu run any virtual pianos including CFX and Pianoteq... And the next ipad pro should get A14X which will have the same performance as M1 (since A12X is to A12 what M1 is to A14). But I am skeptical that virtual piano makers will embrace iPads because they are too lazy to make the interface (and Synthogy would have never done it if Korg hadn't done the work for them...). I mean even on desktop, most of them use third party players like Kontakt, Cantabile, instead of making the effort of making their own.... Let alon the fact that many still look at iPad as an inferior device compared to laptops..


Roland FP-4F, Korg Kross 61, iRig Keys Pro, HD58X, HD598, Focal Spirit Pro, Shure SRH240A, RME Babyface, M-Track Plus, Roland DuoCapture, Presonus Eris E5, iLoud micro monitors, iPad Pro, HP Elite X2, Ivory II ACD, Korg Module for iPad, Garrital CFX full, Vienna Imperial, Ravenscroft, Kawai-Ex Pro
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 3,419
3000 Post Club Member
Online Content
3000 Post Club Member
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 3,419
Originally Posted by Digitalguy
This does not make much difference.... Your said "when the M1 Mac port has been done is mainly the graphical user interface which has to be adapted to a touch screen", I read (unless I misinterpreted) like "once they port to Mac the big part of the work is done". And it's not. Will some developers have to change some of their code to adapt Apple Silicon? Yes, but most of the time it's minor, unless it's very complex apps. Will this help? Sure, but only modestly most of the time. So the port to Apple Silicon will change very little for most apps and developers. Even with Intel you could already write for both Mac and IOS with Swift, it's no different now. Most of the work is not writing for a different architecture, compilers will take car of talking to the different architecture for the most part, but writing for a different OS, in terms of how the OS reacts and what the OS can and cannot do and changing the UI elements to adapt to touch, this is the big part, and this has not changed with the transition to Apple Silicon.

The issue with SSE code is that it is an assembly code, then far more complex compared to the equivalent C/C++ code. This part should be considered as complex. And the compiler can’t convert this code from one CPU to another.

I have already looked at the S-YXG50 sound generator : the sound engine exists in two versions : MMX and floating point. The MMX is more efficient (but wasn’t as ubiquitous than today when Yamaha produced this soft synth). There was a lot of assembly code to convert if we want the same on a M1.

I see Pianoteq roughly divided in two part : the sound generator which may be difficult to port if the SIMD instructions are mostly used, and the graphical interface which should be easy to port (just adapt the graphic to a full screen and perhaps some little other adaptations). If JUCE is used, Windows/Mac/iOS could share mostly the same code.

I have already used a Mac program developed on Qt and recompiled it on Windows without any issue. On the other hand, I have an iOS application which worked well on a iPhone 7, iPhone 12... but not well on a iPhone 11. (Some issues with the screen geometry handling). Porting to iPad involves some testing with different generation to be sure the graphics are all adapted to all of them.

Last edited by Frédéric L; 12/07/20 04:54 PM.

Yamaha CLP150, Bechstein Digital Grand, Garritan CFX, Ivory II pianos, Galaxy pianos, EWQL Pianos, Native-Instrument The Definitive Piano Collection, Soniccouture Hammersmith, Truekeys, Pianoteq
Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 1,334
E
1000 Post Club Member
Offline
1000 Post Club Member
E
Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 1,334
I don't think the code that uses SIMD instructions/coprocessor is necessarily written in assembly. Modern compilers are probably better than us at optimizing the DSP (or its graphical counterparts) especially if the code follows a certain pattern. Also, for some extreme cases, one usually does not directly code, using a library instead (e.g. Intel MKL, but there are others as BLAS). AFAICT these libraries a capable of extracting every bit of performance of the processors, GPUs etc. available.


Kawai ES8, Roland RD2000, Yamaha AG06 mixer, Presonus Eris E5 monitors, Sennheiser HD598SR phones.
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 811
D
500 Post Club Member
Offline
500 Post Club Member
D
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 811
Originally Posted by Frédéric L
Originally Posted by Digitalguy
This does not make much difference.... Your said "when the M1 Mac port has been done is mainly the graphical user interface which has to be adapted to a touch screen", I read (unless I misinterpreted) like "once they port to Mac the big part of the work is done". And it's not. Will some developers have to change some of their code to adapt Apple Silicon? Yes, but most of the time it's minor, unless it's very complex apps. Will this help? Sure, but only modestly most of the time. So the port to Apple Silicon will change very little for most apps and developers. Even with Intel you could already write for both Mac and IOS with Swift, it's no different now. Most of the work is not writing for a different architecture, compilers will take car of talking to the different architecture for the most part, but writing for a different OS, in terms of how the OS reacts and what the OS can and cannot do and changing the UI elements to adapt to touch, this is the big part, and this has not changed with the transition to Apple Silicon.

The issue with SSE code is that it is an assembly code, then far more complex compared to the equivalent C/C++ code. This part should be considered as complex. And the compiler can’t convert this code from one CPU to another.

I have already looked at the S-YXG50 sound generator : the sound engine exists in two versions : MMX and floating point. The MMX is more efficient (but wasn’t as ubiquitous than today when Yamaha produced this soft synth). There was a lot of assembly code to convert if we want the same on a M1.

I see Pianoteq roughly divided in two part : the sound generator which may be difficult to port if the SIMD instructions are mostly used, and the graphical interface which should be easy to port (just adapt the graphic to a full screen and perhaps some little other adaptations). If JUCE is used, Windows/Mac/iOS could share mostly the same code.

I have already used a Mac program developed on Qt and recompiled it on Windows without any issue. On the other hand, I have an iOS application which worked well on a iPhone 7, iPhone 12... but not well on a iPhone 11. (Some issues with the screen geometry handling). Porting to iPad involves some testing with different generation to be sure the graphics are all adapted to all of them.

I have no idea how Pianoteq is coded, so at this point it would only be speculation. Concerning iPad screen ratios the only issues would be the 11in and the 10.9in, the others have all the same ratio... And the apps non optimized for the 11in still run, just as 4:3 so don't take advantage of the full screen. As for older generations, I just hope they don't set the bar too low. Given that the lowest ipad currently sold runs A12, I think they don't need to test earlier than A10 (2018 iPad). Personally pianoteq is not the apps I most looking for. They need to improve it quite a bit for me to consider purchasing it. Personally I mostly looking forward to Garritan CFX. But the more good pianos we can have on iPad the happier I will be...Hopefully iPad will improve to a point they'll have to consider it...


Roland FP-4F, Korg Kross 61, iRig Keys Pro, HD58X, HD598, Focal Spirit Pro, Shure SRH240A, RME Babyface, M-Track Plus, Roland DuoCapture, Presonus Eris E5, iLoud micro monitors, iPad Pro, HP Elite X2, Ivory II ACD, Korg Module for iPad, Garrital CFX full, Vienna Imperial, Ravenscroft, Kawai-Ex Pro
Joined: Sep 2018
Posts: 639
I
500 Post Club Member
Offline
500 Post Club Member
I
Joined: Sep 2018
Posts: 639
I think a lot of credit is due the oft hated Apple for providing a platform devs want to create on. Left to Android music production on tablets would be in a sorry state.

You can get 6gb RAM on the top of the line Pro. That’s getting awfully close to the 8gb minimum for VSTs. In addition, the latest iOS iterations allow for external storage. The obstacle may be that iOS users blanch at prices over $25. Still, I think it’s inevitable, all the VSTs will be available for the iPad.


Jazz at www.newartistsrecords.com. Search Michael Levy. Use Safari for free tracks.
https://soundcloud.com/michael-levy-387395070 for jazz, classical, world, rock tracks Albums on Bandcamp: https://michaelalevy.bandcamp.com/music
Kawai ES8, Casio PXS3000
Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4

Moderated by  Piano World 

Link Copied to Clipboard
(ad)
Pianoteq
Steinway Spiro Layering
(ad)
PianoDisc

PianoDisc
(ad)
Piano Life Saver - Dampp Chaser
Dampp Chaser Piano Life Saver
(ad)
Mason & Hamlin Pianos
New Topics - Multiple Forums
Recital #63 - Call for Submissions
by Sam S - 08/01/21 05:58 AM
Under-piano pedal wood replacement
by Js367 - 08/01/21 01:25 AM
Everett upright Regulation
by wenhen90 - 07/31/21 06:57 PM
Marx
by dolce sfogato - 07/31/21 04:05 PM
Self-teaching and looking for good exercises
by TORaptors2019 - 07/31/21 03:46 PM
Download Sheet Music
Virtual Sheet Music - Classical Sheet Music Downloads
Forum Statistics
Forums42
Topics208,311
Posts3,118,013
Members102,295
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

Virtual Sheet Music - Classical Sheet Music Downloads



 
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 | MapleStreetMusicShop.com - Our store in Cornish Maine


© copyright 1997 - 2021 Piano World ® all rights reserved
No part of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5