Best Plugin For Solo Piano Works ???

[koolkeys]

Most "pro" pianists won't use samples or plugins at all. They will use a real piano.

Again: I know at least two pianists who used a sample library for an album release. One of those is a graduate, he studied piano and composing and he just didn't have the money to go to a studio. The second one actually is an established musician, I'm not sure why he was using Ivory. But again: show me one pianist who's using PT for a solo piano recording. Maybe there are some, but I really doubt.

I said most. Not all. I know that there are some who use libraries. But of those who get paid to be piano players, most will go for a real piano.

Also, what if I can't show you somebody who has used Pianoteq on a solo album? Does that prove I am wrong? Of course, I know people who do(I've used it for solo work, but that probably won't count as I'm not a professional player, but I've been playing every day for over 22 years). I don't exactly keep track.

Many people on the testimonial page use it for studio work: http://www.pianoteq.com/testimonials

Or maybe their references page, with more notable names praising it: http://www.pianoteq.com/references

I would say that is a pretty good list, with many very talented artists and musicians who obviously aren't blind idiots with deaf ears.

Maybe that doesn't count either because it's on the Pianoteq website? I mean, it's not a friend of mine with a degree that I personally saw use it, but surely you don't actually believe that NOBODY has used it on a solo piano project, do you? I've talked to people before who have used it, though they aren't personal close friends. But they do use it for solo and full band work. I KNOW people use it for solo works who are professional pianists. It's a fact that they do.

My point is that it's quite assuming to make a challenge that no professional pianist uses Pianoteq for a solo recording, when you can almost bet the farm that you are far from correct on that.

Of course you need a plugin you can listen to, and Pianoteq is designed to be listened to as with any other plugin.

Again: there're untrained music consumers who were able to recognize that kind of artificial sound. Well, I don't want to say the same stuff again and again, but ... it was an older version and the new release is much better.

Again, I'll issue the challenge that in a blind test, the large majority of people will not be able to tell the difference. Untrained or trained. And yes, I'll put this test together at some point soon and run it on ProRec, and we'll see if I'm right. But in a blind test, where no mention of physical modeling is made, Pianoteq will stand with the rest. If I turn out wrong, I'll gladly admit it.

I've played for a LOT of people over the years, and I can tell you that I've played MUCH less realistic piano sounds and had nobody notice.

I only mention this because some people who criticize Pianoteq have not played it,

Maybe, but I don't belong to this group.

I didn't say ALL people who criticize. I said some.

or can't play.

I don't belong to this group either. And since I also have some experience in mixing, I actually have trained ears. Not those kind of mysterious "golden ears" like some mastering engineers might have, but good enough to distinguish a real sounding plugin from a not so real sounding one.

And again, I said SOME, not all.

But I have experience with mixing, and playing. I feel I have good enough ears to tell the difference as well. So who is right? What about those professional musicians both in this thread and others, along with those on the Pianoteq site; surely they are able to know the difference as well, correct?

And they wonder why it doesn't sound as good when they play their MIDI files through it.

Pointless as far as I'm concerned. You try to defend your arguments by questioning other people skills. Which is, by the way, a doubtful strategy.

You are misreading me then. I am not questioning anyone's skills. I personally have seen people who take a standard MIDI file they recorded with another library, and ran it through Pianoteq and it didn't sound right to them. There is an entire website designed for this exact purpose, running the same file through dozens of pianos. It has nothing to do with people's skills. It has everything to do with the fact that Pianoteq is not designed to be programmed, but played. I have no idea where you got that I was questioning anyone's skills.

Brent

[koolkeys]

Why doesn't everybody agree on the fact that there is no "best plugin for solo piano works" and discuss something more inspiring instead?

I think many of us have said that exact thing. But this IS a discussion board where all types of things are discussed, most being much less important in the world than sympathetic resonance(which stands pretty low on the "important to the world" meter).

If you ended all "what is best" threads with "there is no best", then we wouldn't HAVE a KVR, would we?

Brent

[nineofkings]

What's the best KVR?

[opus_diaboli]

Or maybe their references page, with more notable names praising it: http://www.pianoteq.com/references

I would say that is a pretty good list, with many very talented artists and musicians who obviously aren't blind idiots with deaf ears.

That's pure marketing. You can find statements like that for nearly all products. But the interesting thing is that almost nobody claim to use Pianoteq for his recordings. What they tell us is how great Pianoteq is, but I don't really care that. We all know that the truth of those statements tend to zero. Take a look at Jordan Rudess. He's praising everything as long as he gets paid for it. When you do a bit researching you'll find out that they all use real pianos or other stuff (like a Motif XS).

But wait, there's one artist in that list who seems to use Pianoteq, even on his recordings. I found this statement on his website, regarding to one of his latest solo albums:

"This album is my choice of stuff to hear while sitting on the toilet."



Sorry, I couldn't resist.

[koolkeys]

Or maybe their references page, with more notable names praising it: http://www.pianoteq.com/references

I would say that is a pretty good list, with many very talented artists and musicians who obviously aren't blind idiots with deaf ears.

That's pure marketing. You can find statements like that for nearly all products. But the interesting thing is that almost nobody claim to use Pianoteq for his recordings. What they tell us is how great Pianoteq is, but I don't really care that. We all know that the truth of those statements tend to zero. Take a look at Jordan Rudess. He's praising everything as long as he gets paid for it. When you do a bit researching you'll find out that they all use real pianos or other stuff (like a Motif XS).

But wait, there's one artist in that list who seems to use Pianoteq, even on his recordings. I found this statement on his website, regarding to one of his latest solo albums:

"This album is my choice of stuff to hear while sitting on the toilet."



Sorry, I couldn't resist.

Well, you are talking about the references page. There are quotes on the testimonial page that say it as well. But I included the reference page because there are plenty of reputable artists and musicians there who talk about the pure quality they see in Pianoteq.

And of course, I knew you would dismiss it as marketing. How could any of those artists actually like Pianoteq? They are all probably amateurs just waiting for their big break, right? I mean, that's pretty silly to dismiss the entire page because you don't personally believe somebody would use Pianoteq on their solo work, isn't it? Sure, it COULD be that they were all just paid for their testimonial, but I'm quite confident you couldn't prove that in any case because it's a pretty big claim to dismiss it all as marketing.

Yes, you can find those statements for any product. But does that mean the opinions aren't valid? Is it wrong to give a testimonial if you are well-known?

Again, I've used it on solo work. Does my opinion matter here? I have talked to others who have used it on solo work. Do I have to name names to prove it to you? I don't go around keeping track because I don't particularly need the assurance from others that what I use is good.

You don't really like Pianoteq, I get it. Nothing wrong with that at all. We don't all like the same things. I just don't get the blanket dismissal of a product and the silly un-provable claims by people who don't like it, as if anyone who DOES like it couldn't possibly have liked it legitimately. They are either paid off, or don't have the ears to tell the difference, or whatever. It's essentially an insult to those who do know what they are talking about, but just don't agree with you.

I'm not against libraries. I use them virtually every day. Along with Pianoteq(which I HAVE used for solo work on previous CDs). I have nothing to gain by making the claims I do about Pianoteq. It's just my honest opinion, and whether or not I can personally name people who use it for solo work doesn't discredit my opinion or Pianoteq itself.

Brent

[opus_diaboli]

Sure your opinion does matter here. And as I said, it's not that I really don't like it, at least when we talk about v4. I just think that sampled pianos sound a bit more realistic. Believe me or not but I may even end up buying Pianoteq because it's really fun to play. It has a great keyboard response.

[koolkeys]

Sure your opinion does matter here. And as I said, it's not that I really don't like it, at least when we talk about v4. I just think that sampled pianos sound a bit more realistic. Believe me or not but I may even end up buying Pianoteq because it's really fun to play. It has a great keyboard response.

Fair enough for me then. I don't expect everyone to agree with me, of course. We each have our own qualifications for the things we say, and I'm ok with that.

I enjoy playing all sorts of virtual pianos, so I am just happy there are so many great options.

Brent

[Sampleconstruct]

Why doesn't everybody agree on the fact that there is no "best plugin for solo piano works" and discuss something more inspiring instead?

I think many of us have said that exact thing. But this IS a discussion board where all types of things are discussed, most being much less important in the world than sympathetic resonance(which stands pretty low on the "important to the world" meter).

If you ended all "what is best" threads with "there is no best", then we wouldn't HAVE a KVR, would we?

Brent

Well luckily KVR does offer more than these obsolete what's the best-threads. I just find that emotionally loaded discussions about certain (non)-topics where people get more biased the longer the thread lasts, sort of useless. Btw the best Plugin for solo-piano (and clarinet) works is the Super-Imperial-Double-Grand with bacon and cheese by THAT developer - period!

[koolkeys]

Why doesn't everybody agree on the fact that there is no "best plugin for solo piano works" and discuss something more inspiring instead?

I think many of us have said that exact thing. But this IS a discussion board where all types of things are discussed, most being much less important in the world than sympathetic resonance(which stands pretty low on the "important to the world" meter).

If you ended all "what is best" threads with "there is no best", then we wouldn't HAVE a KVR, would we?

Brent

Well luckily KVR does offer more than these obsolete what's the best-threads. I just find that emotionally loaded discussions about certain (non)-topics where people get more biased the longer the thread lasts, sort of useless. Btw the best Plugin for solo-piano (and clarinet) works is the Super-Imperial-Double-Grand with bacon and cheese by THAT developer - period!

Well, I don't know that they are obsolete. They incite some good discussion, despite the strong differences in opinion. I mean, the piano landscape isn't the same as it was last time this topic was discussed. Heck, with Pianoteq 4 out, it has never been included before.

Yeah, it can get a little repetitive, and no, there will never be a consensus. But I don't think it's a non-topic because I think it's a great conversation to have. You will always have bias, and you will always get passionate about your opinion, but I don't know that it's really an emotional thing. Just discussion, nothing more. There is rarely a topic discussed that hasn't been discussed before, and there is NEVER a topic posted where everyone agrees. I don't see how this thread is any less useful than any other thread?

Brent

[Sampleconstruct]

But why have 2 threads at the same time where a Pianoteq versus the rest of the world is taking place - this thread is named best-plug-in-for-solo-piano-works and the other thread is named "Pianoteq 4 WOW" - so maybe the biased posts about Pianoteq being realistic or not could/should be made in that other thread.

[koolkeys]

But why have 2 threads at the same time where a Pianoteq versus the rest of the world is taking place - this thread is named best-plug-in-for-solo-piano-works and the other thread is named "Pianoteq 4 WOW" - so maybe the biased posts about Pianoteq being realistic or not could/should be made in that other thread.

Well, this thread is about all pianos, the other is just a Pianoteq one. The discussion here has been involving far more than Pianoteq, so I see no reason to have to restrict Pianoteq talk to a PT only thread.

Brent

[afreshcupofjoe]

The problem here is that you are talking to yourself and not paying much attention to what a person is saying. I said it FEELS better as a player how Pianoteq responds like an instrument... Then you respond to me that a bunch of technical specs doesn't prove anything??

The irony here is that you are the one who obviously isn't paying attention to what I am saying. The reason I didn't respond to your comment about the FEEL of pianoteq is because I already addressed the issue numerous times in this thread. It would have been redundant to do it again. And on top if it, I AGREE with you on that point. How many times do I have to say that I think that physical modelling is better at capturing the nuance of a performance than sample libraries? How many times do I have to say that I think physically modeled pianos respond more like a real instrument? You keep insisting that I am somehow ignoring these benefits of physical modeling when I have already made those exact same points myself.

I like Pianoteq. I think it's a great plugin. I recommended it earlier in this thread. I just happen to think that despite their faults, sample library's still produce better results in the end. Obviously someone here is not listening because it is getting awfully tiring to keep repeating the same argument over and over again. Sample libraries and physical modelling both have their advantages and drawbacks. Neither is perfect. Where we differ is that I personally think that sample libraries are the better compromise at this point in time. That is based on the results I have achieved using both. I don't expect you to agree with me, but I'm getting tired of my position being misrepresented.

[EvilDragon]

But again: show me one pianist who's using PT for a solo piano recording. Maybe there are some, but I really doubt.

www.michaelhagglund.com

[K-Bee]

It's easy really. Demo whatever you can and check whatever else is there in the music shops or by youtube clips (but be aware of the compressed audio there).
Play around with what is possible and go from there. That's what I did and that's why I ended up with a Kurzweil PC3x
Despite whatever interesting discussions this "best solo piano" thread have been leading to, it's all a matter of taste. You'll get people's opinions but you do not have other peoples ears, hands or musical mind.
Listen, play and learn

[EvilDragon]

But again: show me one pianist who's using PT for a solo piano recording. Maybe there are some, but I really doubt.

www.michaelhagglund.com

And another one: http://mistheria.com/news.cfm?feature=1 ... id=2006649