It is definitely crazy. Thanks for watching!

After I had watched this video I decided to download a v6.7 for a test and ... YES -- this is insane! Only 160 Mb sound like God. I could not sleep last night. How is that possible??? And the thing is that I can play this plugin without latency at all! I couldn't do that before with the sampled VST's.

Always a time for some worship haha

Hahaha. Thank you!

Welcome aboard!

Me too.

That is super interesting, I did not know that. Thanks for sharing!

The 7th overtone is a pitch, not a note, but that is probably picking nits. I feel overtones are a resultant effect related to the fundamental of the notes. Most notes and instruments generate a variety of of overtones as you point out. I can tune a piano, and tune to the overtones. more than to the fundamental. I call my style "overtone balanced tuning".

I would think its related to the stiffness of the wire, similarly to why we stretch tune real acoustic pianos? If thats the case, then I'dthink we wouldnt need to avoid the 7th overtone in modeled pianos?

@@marvinkmooneyoz That’s a really great point! I didn’t think about that. The controls used at 17:15 sound like they are just changing the eq/resonance of 7x the frequency of the notes he’s playing. So in this case I don’t think it’s related to the stiffness of the string, but if that’s how you would achieve this in real life that’s really rad!

This overtone is something I hear used in blues melodies - not always at the b7th degree. You can drop a 5th from it and get a lowered blues 3rd from it - Also you can bend into & out of it from the sixth and it sounds very much like a typical blues vocal. Barbershop 7th harmonies are also great - Its just doesn't work in the context of leaving it loud in the tuning of piano strings.

Haha, thank you!

Yeah. I wrapped my head around how it all worked after I recorded. First reactions haha

Welcome aboard!

Yes it’s awesome

In fact it's not a library... it's a synth. Something that makes it way more interesting imo, as sample as clearly not as flexible as physical modeling algorithms. The microphone positioning is a good example of that.

Glad you enjoyed it!

Yes it’s awesome haha

Hahaha. You can definitely get some microtonal vibes with some of these stretch tuning settings

I appreciate that!

never tried out Zimmer, might be worth a try.

agreed

yes I kept mistakenly saying recorded out of habit haha. I only scratched the surface on the microphone section, that's for sure. Thanks for watching!

@@SamTheBeardGuy BTW. I really enjoyed your playing!

@@TheIvoryman thanks!

@@SamTheBeardGuy Don’t lie, u thought it was recorded

Yes, very grateful. Thanks for watching!

thanks for watching!

Are the wurlis in the Electric pianos package?

@ Yes they are

thank you! Didn't know that.

thank you!

Hahahaha, lives life in slow motion. SOmetimes I do feel that way.

Hahaha, thank you. One of my favorite hymns.

Thank you!!

Rock on!

Thanks!

Preach. Thanks for watching!

Hahaha, that's right .It's brutal but it's what it needs.

@@SamTheBeardGuy If you'll do another one of these.. I have a request, haha. The Yellow Jacket, by Shaun Martin. That one hits home. I just bought Pianoteq Standard for an educational license price (studying currently, piano is a course). Good deal. I thought I'd get ALL the instruments, though. It's making me choose 3. The choices......... any advice? I'm thinking a Steinway B or D in any case.

Glad you enjoyed it!

Dang that's super interesting. I have played on grand pianos my whole life and there's so much I don't understand about them hahaha. Thanks for sharing.

That's so annoying of KZfaq. If you link to anything outside of Google's direct control, they delete it. For example any data on the massive election fraud that occurred in 2020.

thanks for watching! There was just too much to hit haha, but that's also a really great feature.

You're right I didn't! Oops haha. Thanks for watching.

The morphing is not only amazing for creating custom pianos, it is something you really cannot do with sampled instrument packs. This is PianoTeq showing off, next-level.

Thank you for the kind words! Glad you have enjoyed the videos

@@SamTheBeardGuy Thanks! I noticed that you are using the SL88 Studio controller now. Have you considered making a review about it. It seems very interesting, playable and affordable.

@@JomalTube Hey Jon, I could make a review, but honestly I'm not 100% in love with it.

@@SamTheBeardGuy Might be worth picking up the Roland A88 MK2. I have the A-88 and it works like a dream especially with Keyscape, so responsive.

@@deyvidpetromusic Thanks for the recommendation. I am going to be in the market here soon for a new 88key. Just not happy with the SL

I agree with this 100%

Thank you for sharing all this info! A lot of smarter people have been chiming in on some of this stuff, and I love it.

What I find amazing is Pianoteq gets all the piano sounds from the computer's audio chip using mathematical calculations, not any recording of an actual instrument. The term "Virtual Piano" refers to any sound that is electronically generated, not sounded by the striking of a physical string. Modeling refers to making a model of something that is real. I believe it is used in engineering extensively. For example simulating stresses on a given bridge design. It's amazing Pianoteq sounds so realistic. Some people such as Phil Best find Pianoteq voices more musically expressive than sampled voices when played.

@@JoeLinux2000 Yea, sampled pianos like Keyscape are virtual pianos. Pianoteq is a modeled piano.

Thank you!

Thanks! Such an Awesome God.

thanks!

thanks!

thanks!

For sure, I found the microphone setting halfway through hahaha. Game changer.

@@SamTheBeardGuy Though you only rotated them - you could also change there positions (drag) - stick them right close up to the hammers, under the piano, or all the way on the ceiling at the end of the room. There's also a small viewer for finding far away mics. Since it's all modeled they really went overboard here. Good thing they did

@@TheEranTalmor Thanks for watching! I definitely you could dug in a little more on some of those settings.

My pleasure!

Thanks for watching anyways haha. I wish I had more control over that, but we have limited options on our end

Nothing that comes to mind. All software runs a tiny risk of bugging out, but can't remember this thing crapping out in the past year

@@SamTheBeardGuy Thank you for responding. I appreciate it.

thanks!

My confession is I don't like the Beatles... hahaha

@@SamTheBeardGuy I for one, hate "Let it Be", but that's what I played to try to see how it sounded compared to the recording. Couldn't quite get it there I'm guessing it comes down to the recording equipment or the mastering.

Look for me on sound cloud... dayle spenzer....let it be...pianoteq

Are you talking about the keyboard? RIght now I'm using the studiologic sl-88. The presets in this library are legit, so you probably wouldn't need to tweak like I did.

@@SamTheBeardGuy I found it very odd that you started out with the tweaks.

Blue Bossa was composed by Kenny Dorham, first recorded by Joe Henderson.

Thanks!

yeah haha. I mistakenly kept saying recorded out of habit, but yeah it's all synthesis.

@@SamTheBeardGuy no worries dude, awesome vid!

@@TempestGotThatTrash Thanks!

Thanks for sharing! I learned something this morning haha

@@SamTheBeardGuy ahaha I don't believe it man, with a beard that cool you've got to be the wisest pianist out there

@@EL-vy7mh Hahaha. Maybe.

Oh gosh. I don’t know that I could pick two pianos lol. That’s tough.

@@SamTheBeardGuy ahh that's what I feared!! I think I will go with Steinway D, Blüthner and electric pianos... But that might change during the following hours 😂 So hard

gotta try. It feels good to me. Thanks for watching though

@@SamTheBeardGuy That's the problem. Yes, it "feels" good to some people, but it sounds totally modeled. I can always tell the tone of PianoTeq. But I will try it again. But the people that love it, really love it which is great!

I've never owned a sample library, but given that Pianoteq runs natively on Linux, I'm all in. I've used Linux exclusively for around 20 years.

thanks for explaining, lots of little things like that I don't either know or I've forgotten since graduating a decade ago haha.

thanks!

Thanks for watching!

It's on the radar haha

No post processing, other than a light compression on the master audio

Dang that's helpful, thank you!

You're welcome!

WOW! I've use the program for years and did not know that.

@Raul Sakai real in some ways, less real in others. Piano has many interacting parts. Even just playing two notes simultaneously, you get interaction of the vibration of the strings that doesnt happen with two recordings triggered simultaneously. Then theres things like re-striking a still-vibrating string, tine, or reed.

it's recorded internally through loopback into OBS

hahaha. DONT CRY.

I like them both. The Pianoteq took way longer because there's just so many more piano presets.

@@SamTheBeardGuy You should not have bypassed the harpsichord. It's extremely realistic compared to most. You probably thought it would sound like the rest that are out there. Generally harpsichord is not difficult to synthesize, but I as I said Pianoteq is one step above the rest.

not typically, it's usually grandeur, keyscape, and gentleman

thanks for watching! I'm using Yamaha HS80.

I'm running PT on a 2011 iMac, as several instances in Mainstage plus reverb plugins. I don't have any troubles with performance at all while live playing.

Hahaha, well I might turn them on at some point. But I don't turn them on when I first post, doesn't make any sense to make someone watch an ad on a video that has 500 views lol

nice!

hahaha, yeah

I just learned way more than what I normally learn on a Saturday morning hahaha. Thanks for sharing all this info, good to know, and thanks for watching.

@@SamTheBeardGuy - the sequel. Modeling could go very deep, much deeper than I implied above. Let's make a sidestep to computer games. These used to be called video-games and what you bought was a sort-of maze of video tunnels of prerecorded 2.5D "worlds". Today, these game-worlds are generally drawn as wire-frame objects, fixed in a landscape, or "animate". The objects have surface properties associated and the game has a notion of light sources and the human player's viewpoint from an artificial camera in the game. Between light sources, objects and their surfaces, "rays of light" are calculated in a process called "ray tracing" and this gives perfect patina to surfaces. AI in "animate" objects brings them into virtual life and the main character in the game is the only one that is directed by the human player. In video games, a limited number of walk-throughs have been rendered in the game developers' computers and this is stored as video (which can be compressed with, say, a zip algorithm, or simply because the videos are in JPEG/MPEG they already are compressed). In your modern computer game, all the calculations are done in playtime on your computer and hence graphics cards exist that have "ray tracing" processor instructions that make all the ray tracing faster. So you could model a piano as a wireframe object and give it physical properties by filling the wireframe with "finite elements". This allows dynamic things like physical loads and vibrations or temperature changes to be applied to the wireframe object. In the case of a piano, this could be done with the case, the soundboard, the harp and strings, tuning block, keyboard action, etc. Such a completely virtual instrument that is modeled bottom up could be "run" (played?) in an infinitely large space (or completely anechoic chamber) and a virtual listener could have piano waves ray-traced to their ears. You will need an awful lot of experimentation, to get anywhere near the sound of an existing instrument. I'm not saying it is impossible, but assume it is highly unlikely for you to get anywhere near a Hamburg Steinway D with Renner action or New York Steinway with US action. (Under current Steinway ownership an attempt is made to remove Hamburg v. NY differences). We have to assume that such a completely bottom-up built virtual model will need to be AI-trained with samples, as a reverse engineering way of getting that virtual piano to sound like a specific instrument (individual, i.e. more specific than brand & model). As you could go to a piano store that has, say 5 Steinway D pianos, you would find out they all sound differently. This can be a matter of "voicing" but it certainly also has to do with differences that follow from natural materials (wood) and manual labor. The reference piano's samples play an important role in such a deep modeling approach. With this deep modeling version, that is based on physical properties of a piano, you could alter properties. Maybe replace the piano's "harp" by a harp that has its strings strung parallel, instead of the regular crossed. You may need to make the case longer now, to facilitate the same length strings and get equally deep bass, or change its shape to facilitate the midrange. Making the instrument longer, or changing the shape to a larger volume, you may now also need to make the wall of the case thicker and the sound board could become larger and might consequently need, say, a millimeter (~1/25 inch) more thickness. This changes the character of the instrument a lot. And the fundamental question is if your finite element (or variant thereof) representation of the parts of the piano and their simulated vibration-acoustic interaction is good enough to extrapolate the changes to the sound of such a piano. In other words, if your virtual instrument were to be physically built, would it then really sound the way your model predicts. The moment, however, you have such a virtual instrument, you can place it in a virtual room with acoustic properties and do the acoustic variant of ray tracing. If we take this back to Roland's so-called modeling V-piano of years ago, considering there is not a lot of processing power in there (btw, its sympathetic resonance was not implemented good enough), you can replace steel/copper piano strings by silver and this makes the virtual instrument much longer. This is the result of this kind of modeling approach. But, with available compute power of the day, I think the modeling variants they offered in that physical keyboard have actually been pre-rendered like your old-school video game had its video tunnels - no difficult calculations and simulations in real time. Which is to say that the available models have been pre-recorded in samples. My perception is that Pianoteq is somewhere in between the former lecture and this sequel and exactly where it is, will depend on the virtual instrument (set) you buy from them.

Pianoteq was develop by a French mathematician in conjunction with a top flight piano technician.

I like this explanation - I would think of it as symbolization of analog into digital & compression of that.

@@jesussaddle - sequel II. I feel that is an over-simplification. There is another analogy that I could throw in to hopefully make "sample based" v 'model based" clear while excluding the complete physical modeling with finite elements that I referenced above. Look at 1990s fonts depicted on GUI computer displays. Each letter had a bitmap representation for a specific point size and display resolution. This did not look very good as the displays did not have fine resolution and the bitmaps contained black or white (on or off) pixels. Thus an "o" had jagged edges when looked at it under a magnifying glass. And I could still perceive this even when I printed to 300 DPI. Here the bitmapped fonts are really course sample models. A font set is a virtual instrument and you have samples for letters (notes) and sizes (volume). The depiction (playback) of these fonts could be made better by improving their rendition through application of anti-aliasing techniques. This kind of smoothing must happen in virtual instruments that are sample based. A huge innovation in the font domain was the introduction of technology like TrueType, where a letter is described as a set of mathematical formulae per letter that describe it shape irrespective of size and display resolution. Here the letter's representation is a "model" that does not suffer from the aliasing problem. The formulae (models) are "continuous" when the bitmaps (samples) were "discrete". In the case of the letters, the models are a given. However, the font designer has used a tool to create these model sets. Potentially the letters were designed on paper and scanned (I would call that sampling) after which these scans would be subjected to a tool to convert the scans (samples, bitmaps) into formulae sets. The move from bitmapped fonts to TrueType had the effect that your operating system or application needed to load less data (bitmaps, samples) but now needed to do more complex mathematical calculations. What happens to depict the curves, is that pixels in the display that have the edge run through them, are partially switched on or off and now we have the illusion of perfect round shapes. This is AA (or sharpening in digital photography). As both memory and compute power have become much cheaper with each Moore's Law cycle, and I/O has become much faster, today a sample based virtual instrument could be as good as a modeling based. In both Vienna and Pianoteq, how their Steinway D or Bösendorfer Imperial sounds starts with how these instruments were sampled, the space the piano was in, where the microphones were placed, which microphones were used. And then your own stereo kit you use to reproduce them makes a big difference. As academician, I have a lot of sympathy for Pianoteq's approach but having heard e.g. Vienna (sample based), I have to say that they have done an incredibly good job as well. Probably the load from Pianoteq on your computer is less - it starts with taking in less data and generates the right thing first time right. The sample based approach read in a lot more data and then at playback time must do the instrument's analogy of AA in real time and that's a lot of work too. The modeling in Pianoteq in complexity and elegance goes farther than the TrueType analogy, though, in that it extracts phenomena out of the samples that next can be parametrized in playback separately. Key/hammer/action noise, pedal noise, probably decay, harmonic resonances. A piano's upper octaves have no dampers and hence all lower notes/keys cause harmonic resonance in them (some Steinway individuals have this "ring" that can be nice or ugly) and in clever sampling and modeling the level of this ring could be turned into a separate parameter. This is easily done with one instrument that has it and another that doesn't but by sampling different instruments with different "ring" "colors" the modeling extraction software may identify a parameter that allows us to influence not just the easily sampled/modeled ring but also change its character - say from "sweet" to "aggressive". In a pure sampling-based virtual instrument you would need a lot of samples more than from the one instrument that you sampled, albeit the ring might just be an exercise for the piano tuner to change the voicing of the instrument (that makes a huge difference). If you are curious about different sonic characters between the same piano models from the same brand, then look at Tiffany Poon's latest video in which she has to select a Steinway D that she next will use in a CD recording with a chamber orchestra group playing romantic repertoire. She has 5 model D individuals, characters, to chose from. Real ones. That you listen to through KZfaq and lossy compression of video and audio, probably on computer desktop speakers - not easy to hear the difference the way she does. That said, it seems to me the audio in the video is with a microphone on the camera and this means it records the room and to some extent the resonance from the other pianos with their upper octave strings without dampers ...

I use a Sony A6000, stock lens. nothing fancy haha

yep

Thank you!!

That's tough. PianoTeq has a lot of unique customization, Keyscape sounds fantastic also. Watch my keyscape video and compare

I haven't ever checked it out, but everything I've used from Heavocity I've loved. Tell them to send it to me haha

I'm not quite sure what you mean. Are you referring to loading up the pianoteq patches on the studiologic themselves? What DAW are you using?

Good question - I guess getting out of the pianoteq7 interface nd into a daw will answer my question! What do you recommend? (Live performance oriented with some recording)

PS. You put me onto mantooth, I ws half way there by ear but hadn't formalised a few things, awesome! Can I buy beer for you online?! Haha

I hate the SL88 hahaha. In my recent videos I"m using the Korg D1. Love that

@@SamTheBeardGuy I hear ya. I've been thinking about a Nord Piano but I'm not convinced about the keybed. Never owned a Korg..... hmmm Korg ...... :D

It's top 3 for sure. It's crazy how many people disagree, I think it's too realistic for some people

@@SamTheBeardGuy How can something be too realistic? If the goal is not realism why bother?

@@johnmanire3380 I think 2 reasons. 1, a lot of people have very little experience playing an actual real grand piano. A lot of people grow in the virtual piano/Casio space, maybe play on a grand every few years, but that's it. I have people who grew up like this that don't like the way a real grand piano feels. 2. Some other libraries are more produced, which is going to give a false sense of quality.I think I cut this out of the video, but it's the same concept as loudness. Louder music naturally sounds better, but that doesn't always means its mixed better.

@@SamTheBeardGuy I've heard some really great sounding sampled pianos that are extremely realistic, but the small footprint of Pianoteq makes it very hard to beat. Also the fact that Pianoteq runs natively on Linux is why I'm forced to use it. I haven't heard of any sampled piano that does, but just recently I've learned of a DAW that runs natively on Linux.

@@SamTheBeardGuy I own two Chickering grands and owned a Kawai K2 in the past. Acoustic pianos can be overrated. I've lost interest in acoustics. A good one is very expensive and has many limitations compared to virtual pianos. I'm writing this as Sam rejected the Pianoteq harpsichords. That was a big mistake Sam. They are extraordinarily realistic. That said, I don't play them much because I find the sound irritating.

Hahaha. Thank you!

hahaha, my wife says the same thing

Thanks for watching!

Thank you!! There are many things I don't know haha.

Thanks!

You're welcome!

@@SamTheBeardGuy I predicted your response before I clicked on it. I must be psychic.

hello haha

THanks for watching! I have Mackie HR824mk2 monitors

@@SamTheBeardGuy The sound great. What kind of amp or do they have their own internal amp?

Yooooo. Studiologic SL-88 keyboard, mackie HR824mk2 monitors, big knob interface.

@@SamTheBeardGuy is the Studiologic SL-88 studio action similar to that of a real piano? Would you recommend it?

I'm actually not a huge fan of it. Look at the M-Audio Hammer 88. Same price. I used it in my Keyscape video, felt WAY better. The SL-88 feels sticky and spongy to me, not like a real piano.

The people demand a hardware review!

@@SamTheBeardGuy I've felt the keybed and associated MIDI output is the weak link to Pianoteq, that's why I'd like them to form a partnership with a major hardware manufacturer.

Don't personally own them, but I've played them and they feel great

hahaha thank you

I did!

It’s ok. I wouldn’t recommend

@@SamTheBeardGuy Thanks for your response!

Agreed. They're both fantastic. Can't put an exclusive stamp of approval on either one of them, they're just for different people and situations. THanks for watching!

what are your proffered VSTs for other instruments?

@@encapsulatio Un just getting into orchestral libraries. So, I haven't invested in a high-end yet. My DAW Studio One Pro comes with a Presonus Orchestra library. I also downloaded the free Spitfire BBC Orchestra Discover. Than that, I pretty much stick with the plugins that are included in my DAW subscription, Presonus Sphere. And I also have a synth collection that came with my Arturia Keylab 61 MK2.

@@paullebon323 Next question: What's up with that yantra?

If they sent me something I definitely would!

@@SamTheBeardGuy With you your level of play, you deserve to get everything free. There is an optical keybed associated with Pianoteq. They should send you one of those to evaluate. I think it might be the way to go but they are extremely expensive.

Hey! I have an onstage ksp100

Not a bad idea! Thanks for watching.

It's like, Pianoteq is "build your own pianos"

Noire wins

I def want to try Noire.