srakawhich.blogg.se

1. #Pianoteq 6 vs garrtian cfx full version
2. #Pianoteq 6 vs garrtian cfx full
3. #Pianoteq 6 vs garrtian cfx portable
4. #Pianoteq 6 vs garrtian cfx software

#Pianoteq 6 vs garrtian cfx software

Instead, you let your PC handle the heavy lifting using software colloquially called a piano VST (virtual studio technology), also known as a piano library or simply a virtual piano. I also suspect they are somewhat optimized for the VPC-1, because Ravenscroft actually offers an extremely expensive custom-modified VPC-1 to use with the package if you so desire.The trick is you don’t use the sounds built into your digital piano. I haven't tried Ravenscroft, but I've heard it's a great VST.

#Pianoteq 6 vs garrtian cfx full

So it's worth the full package for that alone. Note that the cheaper "Garritan CFX Lite" doesn't include the ambient mics. Garritan really sounds like you're in a concert hall listening to a 9' grand, and on top of the sound quality it's probably one of the top most playable/responsive VSTs out there. I don't even use the reverb options in the software, as the natural sound is more than enough. It makes a huge difference in the soundstage of CFX, and IMO it's head and shoulders over the artificial "convolutional reverb" used by just about everything else in order to create fake reverb. What makes Garritan stand out is the fact that it's recorded in a large studio hall, and they use ambient mics placed in the studio in order to capture the true, natural reverb of the space. I use Garritan CFX mainly due to the positive reviews and the performances by Philip Johnston ( ) using it with an AvantGrand N3 as MIDI controller. Yes, I spent way too much money on VSTs for a beginner. But I know a lot of people just don't like the current state of modelled sounds. I spend about 50 percent of my time in Pianoteq, 40 percent in Ravenscoft, and 10 percent in Garritan. The customizability makes me feel like I really have my own piano, it feels more responsive than anything else, plus it gets better with each update. The only thing I really prefer about the Garritan is that it sympathetic/pedal resonances sound a tad better.Īll that being said, I'm still partial to Pianoteq.

#Pianoteq 6 vs garrtian cfx portable

I use mainly it with my portable keyboard when I'm travelling, but sometimes I use it at home when I don't feel like turning on my PC.Įdit: Also, not gonna lie, this video comparing the VST to the actual Ravenscroft convinced me:

The Ravenscroft also has a $36 iOS app that sounds identical to the desktop version except it's less customizable and only includes the close mic position.

Not really relevant, but the UI is also a lot prettier. The Ravenscroft loads faster and feels just a tiny bit more responsive. The Garritan seems to have a tiny bit of noise on low velocity samples that can be distracting if you're using headphones. Those little surprises are what makes it feel 'real.' Where I get bored of the Garritan after a little while and want to tweak the sound or switch VSTs, I can play the Ravenscroft for hours on end. The crystal clear attack on the Ravenscroft isn't for everyone, but it exudes character throughout the range without being excessive. The Garritan sound amazing, but is pretty clinical. The Ravenscroft indeed has much more character. My reasoning for preferring the Ravenscroft: That could very well affect my opinion, although I mainly use the close perspective on the Ravenscroft anyway.

#Pianoteq 6 vs garrtian cfx full version

That said, keep in mind I only have the Garritan CFX Lite with one mic position, as opposed to the full version with multiple recording perspectives. I'm a beginner, so take my opinion from a player's perspective with a grain of salt, but I attend live performances frequently and am particular about sound. I use them both, and prefer the Ravenscroft by a small margin.