Organteq is (finally) released!

[BBFG#]

Hauptwerk... they are moving to iLok.

That will certainly increase the Organteq sales!

[Russell Grand]

But way too pricey.
($269.10 after a 10% discount!)

Good lord. Welp, I guess I can remove that one from my wishlist.

[Dasheesh]

I only did a quick skip through of the first 3 examples... my impression is they got the spacial presence right... like really right.... but its missing low end growl. it sounds like a really, really good sample in those examples. JMO.

[velryphon]

I've played it all yesterday evening, it is quite impressive, once again, bravo Modartt !
The trills are really convincing compared to the real thing, I've never played a sample based organ VST that matched this before (but never tried Hauptwerk).

The price is a bit high for personnal use on a budget, it matches Pianoteq 6 Standard.
Before learning piano I started with organ so this kind of instrument is definitively a must have for me.
I like ergonomically simple and light weight VST, and virtual modeling VSTs are the best products for my taste.
I've been using EZKeys Pipe Organ for a while, maybe not the best but very convincing sound and simple to use. This Organteq should replace it now, I just have to gather some cash ^^.

[pekbro]

Nice!

[velryphon]

I only did a quick skip through of the first 3 examples... my impression is they got the spacial presence right... like really right.... but its missing low end growl. it sounds like a really, really good sample in those examples. JMO.

I see what you mean concerning low end growl, but these characteristics depends deeply on the actual organ modeled. I've heard many Bach organ records that did'nt have much grownl on the low ends, it depends on the organ design itself, the stops available, the pipe types etc.

[EvilDragon]

With pipe organs, there's little reason to do physical modeling when you can do multi-loop sampling

I disagree, because you cannot ever get a clean sample of a single pipe, then you get the reverb of the church/theater/whatever (no matter how closely you mic the organ) overlapping across the hundreds of samples being played simultaneously, plus you can never do the realtime non-linear interaction between pipe and exciter depending on the notes you play. Samples just don't do this stuff

[velryphon]

I only did a quick skip through of the first 3 examples... my impression is they got the spacial presence right... like really right.... but its missing low end growl. it sounds like a really, really good sample in those examples. JMO.

After having played it once more this midday, it does have the huge low end growl when using all the stops on pédales .

[teilo]

Hauptwerk... they are moving to iLok.

That will certainly increase the Organteq sales!

No it will not. Hauptwerk has used a dedicated HASP dongle since at least version 2. HASP dongles are for a single vendor. iLok is multi-vendor. This is a good thing. Now I will only need my eLicenser, CodeMeter, and iLok dongles, all three of which are multi-vendor.

[teilo]

With pipe organs, there's little reason to do physical modeling when you can do multi-loop sampling

I disagree, because you cannot ever get a clean sample of a single pipe, then you get the reverb of the church/theater/whatever (no matter how closely you mic the organ) overlapping across the hundreds of samples being played simultaneously, plus you can never do the realtime non-linear interaction between pipe and exciter depending on the notes you play. Samples just don't do this stuff

It is true it is difficult to get a clean dry sample in most circumstances, but you can in others, and Milan has done so. The MasterWorks Skinner is one such organ. It's difficult, but not impossible. There are even sets out there where the individual pipes have been recorded in a special rig, in a separate room, so that they are indeed bone dry.

Most people using wet sets are not using them for performance, but because they actually want to hear the wet settings in which they were recorded. I know that the golden ear of a pipe-head might not be fooled, but the difference is narrow on their V4 engine.

As for what samples can and cannot do: Hauptwerk is far more than a glorified sample engine. I do not know exactly what Hauptwerk is doing, but their wind model does, in fact, take total air velocity/volume into account to account for differences in attack and tuning, and even wind turbulence, as more and more pipes are played. This is something a sample engine does not do, but Hauptwerk's does. If I had to guess, it is doing real-time spectral transformation and filtering. Their enclosed divisions, likewise, are impressive in their realism. The volume of a division is not only reduced, but the sound is damped in a manner consistent with the closing of the shutters. Further, the mixing engine is doing a lot more than just adding samples together. If it were, as you say, the mixed reverb overlap would muddy up the result terribly, and that is obviously not happening in Hauptwerk.

I do not disagree with you in theory. Though Organteq is an extraordinary piece of software, the best I have heard as far as synthesis goes, it still lags Hauptwerk in realism. I'm sure it will get even better.

If you haven't before, check out http://www.contrebombarde.com Massive library of performances, most of which are produced on Hauptwerk.

[teilo]

So here's my own informal test. These are two very different organs, but I tried to make it as fair as I could. Both are dry from the plugin, with reverb and compression provided by Fabfilter Pro R and Pro C2. Registration is not the same, but analogous. The Hauptwerk is the Skinner organ, which is an American organ, whereas the Organteq is modeled after a French romantic instrument. Both came from the same Logic Pro X file. I configured the Organteq to respond to the same MIDI channel config I use with Hauptwerk.

https://f001.backblazeb2.com/file/mwdie ... ptwerk.m4a
https://f001.backblazeb2.com/file/mwdie ... ganteq.m4a

Both sound great to my ears. There is an occasional odd squeak coming from one the Organteq stops, which I assume is on purpose.

Overall my impression is that the Organteq is, if anything, almost too perfect. I guess that's a compliment, but I actually don't like organs that are so perfectly precise, because they end up sounding sterile. I have the same criticism of some modern installations of real instruments.

But regardless, the Organteq proves that physical modeling is the future. Just need to model the imperfections better.

[EvilDragon]

Those squeaks are the imperfections Variable attack transients, non-linearities between pipe and exciter, that's exactly what's making it less-than-perfect, in fact.

That said those two examples really sound like apples and oranges (maybe because an apple was compared to an orange?)...

[NothanUmber]

Sounds good! It's fun to play around with the demo.
To really shine this probably needs a matching controller though. With several manuals, foot pedals, 40+ registers etc. No place for that I fear - but would certainly be fun!

[teilo]

Those squeaks are the imperfections Variable attack transients, non-linearities between pipe and exciter, that's exactly what's making it less-than-perfect, in fact.

That said those two examples really sound like apples and oranges (maybe because an apple was compared to an orange?)...

For sure. Completely different kinds of organs. I have the St. Eucaire, that is more similar to the Organteq that I should try as well.

[kvaca]

With pipe organs, there's little reason to do physical modeling when you can do multi-loop sampling, with multiple attack and decays, proper phase matching, randomized detuning, wind chest turbulence modeling, etc.

actually, there is very good reason to do physical modelling with pipe organs:
-to avoid any need of looping /real pipes dont sound looped, too/
-to avoid playing the same attack or release on same pipe again and again /even the biggest sample libraries got 1-2 attack and up to 3 time-dependent release samples...real pipe NEVER EVER sounds the same again with repeated note../
-to avoid the need of any sample processing or modelling /like wind modelling,detuning,tremulants etc../ because any sample modelling is completely WRONG when applied on wet samples /this way you detune the reverb too which sounds from surreal to plain bad and AFAIK there are no anechoic-style dry sample libraries of big church pipe organs whatsoever- you guess why /
-to retain interactions between pipes and sections which are missing in most sample libraries /you will be amazed how different can organ pleno sound when its not assembled from many individual samples with no realistic interactions between them/
all of these /and even many more.../ inherent sampling limitations can result in certain "fatigue" or "boring" players experience after longer period of time and all these limitations CAN be overcomed by proper PM...but only time will tell if Organteq is capable of this level of perfection /..and if our computers will be able to handle it/, for first listen and in its current state it still doesn't sound very convincing to me...but the same was true for Pianoteq 1