![]() Hell someone really determined with dial up internet connectivity only might be able to download it! You wouldn't be eating up gigabytes of data bandwidth trying their/his product because it's just a few megabytes of synthesizer. ![]() It should be considered that important IMHO. That still doesn't make much sense though because they should have added it to the first product rather than develop the second product and so on. Maybe it's a really small outfit and it's too much hassle for him/them to produce a demo version I don't know? They have no reason (if their product is stable cross platforms, reliable and plays well) for not letting you have a demo versions as far as I can see. So that's really what you should compare it to, not cumbersome sample based products. A small memory footprint/download synthesizer, so is the Sampleson range of products. If you compare it to the physical modelling competition of a combination of electric and acoustic pianos Arturia, GSI, AAS and Modartt all offer demo versions. If you're only considering piano based products that's one thing. Okay well almost all of them that are synthesis based, and every single one that I use, outside of a few sample based instruments. I totally agree, but which virtual instrument offers a demo version, besides Pianoteq? I can't think of any of the major one that does it regularly, some of them do, but only on special occasions! So I also welcome the competition when they join properly! However a collection of the Sampleson offerings will add up and compared to Pianoteq Stage with the free KIVIR collection then they start to look like poor value anyway. Not including the CP80/70 which sort of sits in both worlds. Acoustic pianos appear to be a different ball game. To me that offering doesn't sound like a real piano to the extent that Pianoteq does, however in the demos their efforts sound like good sounding virtual instruments in their own right, and they have good looking GUIs by the looks of things.Įlectric tine and reed pianos are evidently much easier to model with multiple companies having produced pleasing EP models. Or perhaps by the time the programmers are up to the task they will? - but I will never know until they offer that. I will welcome them when they stop treating the potential customers so badly, not even having the courtesy to offer a demo version!!! ![]() So hopefully this one (and the updated Arturia V3) will push the fine Pianoteq people to do further improvements and keep a fair price. Competition is good, it'd provides alternatives and choices to people, and pressure to companies to improve quality and reduce (or at least not increase) prices. On the other hand, even if I don't like it, I welcome it. Worse than even free samples like the Salamander or the Chateau Grand (see if you are not familiar with it - that is so light that in a pinch I use it from my wimpy phone!!!)Īlso, no Linux version, not ever consider for a purchase, as far as I am concerned. ![]() Listening to their demos on that page, it sounds like a toy to me, and I mean on side-to-side listen, not going with memory. MetaPiano was made upon Spectral Modeling, a technique that provides realistic sounds since it's based on real samples and not hypothetical approaches like physical modeling. Spectral Engine 2.0 generates the sound every time you play it, making every note unique and irreplaceable since it's created on the fly. I would think Modartt’s model is more complex and accurate, but the concept is more or less the same.Ī custom-made algorithm disassembles the audios and extracts the main characteristics for each note and noise. I think the basic idea is similar- design your algorithm/model to match the recorded harmonic spectra of your chosen piano as closely as possible. I'm sure that Modartt are working on some great things, but it has been quite a long time now since the last update. However, one thing I do like about it is the crispness of the attack - I hope that the next update of Pianoteq will improve in this respect. Having listened to the samples of the Sampleson product, I wouldn't be tempted for 2 reasons:ġ) The classical examples sound rather clunky, with way too much 'thump' in the background.Ģ) I don't particularly care for the timbre of the piano. I'm not expert enough to understand all the differences, but it is a different approach. Apparently Sampleson's approach is 'Spectral modelling' as opposed to 'Physical modelling'. It's quite interesting but I don't think it's a serious rival to Pianoteq.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |