Pianoteq 6!

[David]

I'd like more details!

IOW, I'd like to know what the dev-only parameters are, or put another way, what the practical limits are within any given instrument, from a parameter POV, the stuff you can and can't access as a mere user, even Pro, or something like that…

Which has basically been my starting question with every PM device I've ever been able to get my hands on…which is pretty much everything I could afford for the last 30 years or so:)

Pianoteq Pro is about the deepest one I've yet had the pleasure to access, even though it's also one of the most limited, in the sense of targeting very specific real instruments to model, rather than promising limitless scope for instrument design.

[David]

… otherwise their whole model of selling add-ons wouldn't work.

Well, I still buy presets from you, Simon, for synths I could theoretically program myself to get the same results:) I tell myself that these are "instructional" purchases, but really they're skill rentals!

[Sampleconstruct]

… otherwise their whole model of selling add-ons wouldn't work.

Well, I still buy presets from you, Simon, for synths I could theoretically program myself to get the same results:) I tell myself that these are "instructional" purchases, but really they're skill rentals!

Thanks David

[Sampleconstruct]

I'd like more details!

IOW, I'd like to know what the dev-only parameters are, or put another way, what the practical limits are within any given instrument, from a parameter POV, the stuff you can and can't access as a mere user, even Pro, or something like that…

Which has basically been my starting question with every PM device I've ever been able to get my hands on…which is pretty much everything I could afford for the last 30 years or so:)

Pianoteq Pro is about the deepest one I've yet had the pleasure to access, even though it's also one of the most limited, in the sense of targeting very specific real instruments to model, rather than promising limitless scope for instrument design.

Chromaphone will also get your pretty far in modelling your own but it also offers basic models which you can then tweak, you don't really get to the bone of the engine in order to invent "impossible" models which might sound terrific...

[David]

I'd like more details!

IOW, I'd like to know what the dev-only parameters are, or put another way, what the practical limits are within any given instrument, from a parameter POV, the stuff you can and can't access as a mere user, even Pro, or something like that…

Which has basically been my starting question with every PM device I've ever been able to get my hands on…which is pretty much everything I could afford for the last 30 years or so:)

Pianoteq Pro is about the deepest one I've yet had the pleasure to access, even though it's also one of the most limited, in the sense of targeting very specific real instruments to model, rather than promising limitless scope for instrument design.

Chromaphone will also get your pretty far in modelling your own but it also offers basic models which you can then tweak, you don't really get to the bone of the engine in order to invent "impossible" models which might sound terrific...

I was specifically thinking of the AAS stuff in that comparison/comment, and should have finished the last sentence thus: "…limitless scope for instrument design, while offering a mere handful of parameters with which to attempt that!"

I've never understood why AAS's work for others (Sculpture, Collision, Tension) is so much more open ended, feature-rich and, to my mind, more powerful than their own signature devices. I mean, it's clear that their for-hire stuff is intentionally open-ended, and less defined in terms of functional purpose than their string, guitar, synth, keys, and bang-on-it modelers; but why have they never made their own "ultimate" does-anything one? Since Tassman, anyway… I keep buying them, but I've always found them more boring, ultimately, than as endlessly fascinating, as, say, Sculpture.

[EvilDragon]

Are "instruments" distinguished simply by name in the Browser; e.g., is the Celtic Harp a different "instrument" than the Concert Harp?

Yes.

[EvilDragon]

I'd like more details!

IOW, I'd like to know what the dev-only parameters are, or put another way, what the practical limits are within any given instrument, from a parameter POV, the stuff you can and can't access as a mere user, even Pro, or something like that…

Nobody knows except Modartt. I think Phillippe once said that their own development version looks like an airplane cockpit, so there is a buuuuuuuunch of parameters we're not privy to. We probably don't REALLY want that Gordian knot of parameters to deal with!

[David]

Yup—I'm way more than delighted with what's there in Pro, but still curious:)

Thanks for clarifying!

[aMUSEd]

I'd like more details!

IOW, I'd like to know what the dev-only parameters are, or put another way, what the practical limits are within any given instrument, from a parameter POV, the stuff you can and can't access as a mere user, even Pro, or something like that…

Which has basically been my starting question with every PM device I've ever been able to get my hands on…which is pretty much everything I could afford for the last 30 years or so:)

Pianoteq Pro is about the deepest one I've yet had the pleasure to access, even though it's also one of the most limited, in the sense of targeting very specific real instruments to model, rather than promising limitless scope for instrument design.

Chromaphone will also get your pretty far in modelling your own but it also offers basic models which you can then tweak, you don't really get to the bone of the engine in order to invent "impossible" models which might sound terrific...

I was specifically thinking of the AAS stuff in that comparison/comment, and should have finished the last sentence thus: "…limitless scope for instrument design, while offering a mere handful of parameters with which to attempt that!"

I've never understood why AAS's work for others (Sculpture, Collision, Tension) is so much more open ended, feature-rich and, to my mind, more powerful than their own signature devices. I mean, it's clear that their for-hire stuff is intentionally open-ended, and less defined in terms of functional purpose than their string, guitar, synth, keys, and bang-on-it modelers; but why have they never made their own "ultimate" does-anything one? Since Tassman, anyway… I keep buying them, but I've always found them more boring, ultimately, than as endlessly fascinating, as, say, Sculpture.

I don't think AAS had anything to do with Sculpture, and their Ableton devices have not been updated since version 1 so are on a par with the versions 1's of the AAS equivalents, but the AAS ones are more capable now.

[David]

Hmm, I've "known" for many years that AAS built Sculpture for Apple, but I can't recall where I got that info; certainly it was online, that at least I can recall. I DO recall being surprised and impressed when I learned that, but just now failed to find any supporting evidence online.

Anybody here know anything about this?

Sure, the AAS stuff gets improved when updated, but I still struggle to bend them into doing anything truly surprising, so for my money anyway, they've gone too far in the direction of predictable results and not far enough into "anywhere you can imagine, or have never yet imagined" territory. It's just that, for me, all the AAS device-parameters seem to stop way short of weird, when I want them to go way beyond that! Just MO.

Maybe they learned from Tassman that this is the best way to make a living creating PM devices; I wouldn't be surprised! But I'm sticking with Sculpture. And Kaivo. And Prism. And Resonans. And MSoundFactory. And Falcon…and now Pianoteq:)

[NothanUmber]

According to a posting on a Logic forum, Sculpure was written by a former Emagic/now Apple employee:

"Markus Sapp from emagic/Apple did Sculpture, the same guy who developed the ES2 (and Klopfgeist )

http://www.sapp.de

Here's one of his patents on modelling string vibration, probably used in Sculpture (or derived from that work):
http://imechanica.org/files/StringVibrationPatent.pdf"

https://www.logicprohelp.com/forum/view ... hp?t=72710

[David]

Thanks—One more speck of disinformation cleansed from my aging and overclogged brain.

[Sampleconstruct]

Whoever wants to play with the Tabla Harp, attached is a zipped fxp-preset.

Tabla Harp.fxp.zip

[Spitfire31]

Thank you, Simon! Happy Easter!

[David]

Whoever wants to play with the Tabla Harp, attached is a zipped fxp-preset.

Tabla Harp.fxp.zip

Cool, thank you!

I guess this requires the Harp instrument, yes? I have that, so I can't tell if it wouldn't work for anyone without it.

I certainly hope there will be more fxp file sharing here! In that spirit, I offer this:

Steinway D Prepared 3.fxp.zip

Setting up a Buff and a Rattle pedal adds prep-y options:)