Pianoteq 6.1 released

[tack]

From a Pianoteq newsletter:

Pianoteq 6.1 available

Version 6.1 introduces a new spatialisation technique which brings more air and presence to the instruments, increasing realism. Minor re-voicing has also been done on some instruments/presets.

Furthermore, new features are introduced along with support for the NKS (Native Kontrol Standard) extended plug-in format from Native Instruments.

Listen to a comparison between 6.0 and 6.1 here:
https://www.pianoteq.com/listen_compari ... re=v60-v61

Pianoteq customers can download from the user area: https://www.pianoteq.com/user_area

A free trial version is also available: https://www.pianoteq.com/try

[EvilDragon]

Modartt just keeps on giving and giving...

[tack]

I appreciated the before and after demos. The differences are subtle but noticeable. These things always seem more compelling under your fingers so I'm looking forward to taking it out for a spin.

[Lawrence]

Many people seem to love Pianoteq. I got a free version with my Arturia 88. I just don't hear it. Dead, dead, dead. No acoustic piano I ever played over 50 years sounded as airless. This version's demos don't change my mind.

[tack]

It could sound better to be sure, but it just feels right. (Or much more right.)

[KyleJudkins]

I'm so glad I don't own it.

it would turn into SM brass all over again... where I buy 90872398723 brass libraries and just keep going back.

[EvilDragon]

https://hearthis.at/xnwdv7yv/valse-cour ... timentale/

Doesn't sound dead at all.

[KyleJudkins]

https://hearthis.at/xnwdv7yv/valse-cour ... timentale/

Doesn't sound dead at all.

Feels a bit limited at points... I'd like to hear that at like 80% of the signal, with no compression/limiting

it sounds gorgeous, but that's largely because whomever is playing is playing something gorgeous - but it definitely gives me sample modeling vibes at some points... where I'm pretty sure it's samples, but it definitely captures a performance well - which might be the more convincing part of the equation to me

[EvilDragon]

That's because it's the cinematic preset, so it has some compression going on... It does seem perfect for the piece. But even with compression it does sound alive. Well to this pair of ears anyways.

[KyleJudkins]

That's because it's the cinematic preset, so it has some compression going on... It does seem perfect for the piece. But even with compression it does sound alive. Well to this pair of ears anyways.

ohh it does, it just seems like the top dynamics are squashed a little too much - but the bulk of the piece still sounded human)

[Lawrence]

https://hearthis.at/xnwdv7yv/valse-cour ... timentale/

Doesn't sound dead at all.

We disagree. Still, we must try to move on.

The attacks sound great. I don't like anything that happens after that.

[EvilDragon]

Hah, ironic, usually most people not liking Pianoteq suggest that attacks are all wrong in Pianoteq.

BTW it does sound like the "Condition" slider in that demo was set to "Mint", which would mean perfectly regulated piano (I still wouldn't call it "dead"). Things get much more livelier when that slider is moved towards the right.

[Lawrence]

Ironic indeed! The problem people probably have is that the attacks are livelier than the sustains.

It's a subjective world. As I said, I have P5 "basic" or some such, a free version that came with my Arturia controller. I played it for a few days. Playing it can be fun, there's a definite thing as to its playability. However, I always ended up switching to one of my gazillion other pianos for any final, and really, I don't much like any of the 6 or 6.1 demos up on their site. YMMV, and obviously does.

I'm not rooting against them, not at all. I want better and better samples or models or whatever. Time has proven that I have a dangerous addiction to piano samples, but I want them to SING. Pianoteq doesn't, not for me, not yet. I hope it will someday.

[tack]

Personally the only model I've been able to get on with sonically is still the Bluethner. Their model D was significantly improved in v6 but I still feel the Bluethner takes first prize by a generous margin.

[Ashermusic]

Many people seem to love Pianoteq. I got a free version with my Arturia 88. I just don't hear it. Dead, dead, dead. No acoustic piano I ever played over 50 years sounded as airless. This version's demos don't change my mind.

+1. I don't care how playable it is if I don't dig the sound, and I don't.

[EvilDragon]

I always get angry with sampled pianos because they just aren't as playable or responsive, and I will always find sour points in any one of them: noise buildup from multiple micing (solvable, but can kill a lot of the sound if overdone), lack of realistic behavior with pedalling (every sample library fails in at least one or two pedalling methods which Pianoteq achieves with aplomb), stereo image gets borked on just some of the notes at some of velocity layers, heaps of other possible random issues. There is no perfect piano sample library, they all have such flaws. Kills inspiration when playability should be #1 (and is what inspires myself personally, if something responds to what I tell it to do PROPERLY like the real deal). This is why Pianoteq will always win for me.

[Ashermusic]

I always get angry with sampled pianos because they just aren't as playable or responsive, and I will always find sour points in any one of them: noise buildup from multiple micing (solvable, but can kill a lot of the sound if overdone), lack of realistic behavior with pedalling (every sample library fails in at least one or two pedalling methods which Pianoteq achieves with aplomb), stereo image gets borked on just some of the notes at some of velocity layers, heaps of other possible random issues. There is no perfect piano sample library, they all have such flaws. Kills inspiration when playability should be #1 (and is what inspires myself personally, if something responds to what I tell it to do PROPERLY like the real deal). This is why Pianoteq will always win for me.

And there is the difference between you and me. Inspiring sound is #1 for me, and I suspect Larry. Playability, #2, realism #3, lack of imperfections #873.

[Quasar]

This exact Pianoteq conversation comes up recurringly VI web forums, and (drum roll please! LOL) the correct answer is:

v6 is vastly improved from earlier versions (haven't loaded 6.1.1 yet, but will today) and the dead, plasticky sound that plagued earlier versions has been greatly mitigated, almost to the point where it can hold its own against top-shelf sample libraries. This plus the superior expressive touch response arguably puts it over the top as the v-piano of choice. Actually, it's 110% there at both the high and low registers, but is slightly weaker in the approximately 2 octave region surrounding middle C.

[ComposerGuy]

I’m a piano player and I own so many sampled pianos I’m embarrassed to say how many. Pianoteq is THE MOST playable of anything I own. That goes a long way in writing tracks as I’m able to stay inspired. CFX is a close second but not as playable.

[tack]

I think even Pianoteq's detractors don't argue it wins on playability. It just seems there's a disagreement about where we each rank those list of key qualities Jay mentioned. Some of us are inspired by playability more than sonic quality. I have no trouble seeing the other side of this coin myself, because when I listen back to something I've recorded with Pianoteq, I start to hear all the things I dislike about its sound that somehow didn't bother me nearly as much while performing.

Under my fingers it's a different experience. Am I playing Chopin or Debussy? Then you'll have to pry Pianoteq from my cold dead hands.

And I'm just a mediocre pianist. I have to imagine that feeling is even more intensified for someone competent?

[EvilDragon]

I have to imagine that feeling is even more intensified for someone competent?

Absolutely. I'm a mediocre player too, but I wouldn't want to attempt even playing a piece that needs a pretty competent player, like MacDowell's Witches Dance, on any sample library, honestly. Can you imagine how many nuances would be lost?

https://www.pianoteq.com/audio/yc5/MacD ... Felice.mp3

[Marius]

Since the Bluethner model arrived, I've been entirely satisfied with the Pianoteq sound, and playability remains peerless. The out-of-the-box sound can often be too perfect, kind of lifeless and alien, but that's part of the appeal...you don't use the default, you tweak. The engine lets you tailor the model to fit your exact preferences for piano sound.

It seems you either search and search for a library that happens to have sampled a piano exactly as you want it to sound and hope that it's also well sampled, or you sit down with Pianoteq and "make" that sound yourself, with guaranteed playability. Option B seemed preferable (and cheaper!) to me, so it's the way I've gone.

The only reason I reach for piano samples these days is if I'm after a particular character that would take longer to emulate than to just call up the sample—weird uprights, prepared piano, etc.

[Lawrence]

I’m a piano player and I own so many sampled pianos I’m embarrassed to say how many. Pianoteq is THE MOST playable of anything I own. That goes a long way in writing tracks as I’m able to stay inspired. CFX is a close second but not as playable.

Agreed, very playable. Is it the piano that ends up on your tracks after you've played it in?

[ComposerGuy]

Larry, it really depends on a couple of things. Mostly though, no. If piano is not a very prominent part of the track I’ll usually leave it go as it usually takes too much time adjusting velocity curves/dynamics to make another one sit where it sits.