I LOVE physical modelling modelling as a concept, I think it's genius and I really like messing around with every modelling synth I can find but none of them ever really "convinced" me if you know what I mean.

I've tried a few - Korg's MOSS (which I actually don't like - I could never get anything good out of it and I honestly don't get why everyone raves about it), Yamaha's VL board (actually not bad at all for the time, especially with a breath controller!), Pianoteq (I love how versatile it is - but I always end up replacing it with my trusty S700/C7 on my Motif), Logic and Ableton's corresponding physmod synths (I find Logic's Sculpture to be infinitely more useful and approachable than Ableton's 4 MAX devices) and finally Audio Modelling's SWAM synths. I really want to like these but something about them always sounds.. off. One moment they sound about as close as physical modelling could get - the next they sound incredibly artificial. Some of the articulations also sound very "bad sample"-ish, I don't really know how to explain it.

How about you? What are your experiences with them? Any recommendations?

And as an added question - does anyone actually use any of these for anything ""serious""?

 

I think at some point you have to ask yourself "Does this really sound 'off' or does it just sound 'different'?"

If I put Lounge Lizard next to any sampled electronic piano, the worst I can say is that LL sounds 'different'. I'd have no reservations using Lounge Lizard, SWAM or Pianoteq for serious projects.

Thumbs down for 'Augmented Strings' and 'MODO Bass' (v2.0 coming soon) from me though.

 

Chromaphone's cymbals sound convincing.
Also nobody noticed SWAM when I used it, so I guess it's realisitc enough.

 

Pianoteq is interesting in that their Steinway models are supposed to be their bread and butter, but glancing across the internet, you'll find people prefer its harpsichords, pianofortes and lesser-known pianos like Petrofs. It is a useful tool for composing and sketching ideas but I have yet to see someone drag it onstage in a laptop for a live performance.

My physical modelled piano of choice is Acoustica's Pianissimo. It's not perfect. but since I'd be applying effects like reverb, compression, EQ and maybe even delay in a mix, obtaining a pristine sound doesn't matter.

 

I think it's a mixed bag. SWAM stuff definitely sounds "off" - very impressive though - just.. "off".
Pianoteq sounds good and I quite like it, it's just that it's a bit too.. clean? Raw? It's definitely the kind of thing I need to spend some time on and shape to my liking - in the end I probably wouldn't be able to get it to sound as good as the pianos I already use. Not a knock on the synth itself, I'm just not skilled enough to get what I want out of it.

As for Lounge Lizard - I honestly didn't even consider it, there are SO many EP plugins that I lost track of them and EPs aren't something I use frequently.

 

edirol orchestral > swam.

but really the most recent solo brass are phenomenal out of the box. the flugelhorn with psp vintage warmer is near perfection .
sadly physical modeled saxes aren't there just yet , but swam clarinets are the best out there imho

ive been super lazy uploading new tracks , but swam is my go to rocksteady/ska/dub/grindhouse jazz horn selection.
using fl studio newtone,melodyne ,etc helps humanize immensely

 

Last edited: May 5, 2022

That's my experience with Pianoteq too, I really like the Harpsichords and some less known/weirder pianos. I wouldn't mind if they sold just the harpsichord part for a small price (NOT 49€..) I've never heard of Pianissimo, gonna look into it now.

 

Last edited: May 5, 2022

Careful, I'm very attached to Orchestral and I might unironically agree with that

 

Agreed. But then the next question you should ask yourself is " Is the usage of this amount of resources really worth the amount of added "realism" created by modeling? And then weigh if that gain is worth it compared to sample libraries in Kontakt/Falcon, etc.

I always come up with No. I like Sculpture, but I never put it into a project.

 

Anyma Phi Physical Modeling Synth Review

www.synthtopia.com/content/2022/02/09/anyma-phi-physical-modeling-synth-review/

 

There's also the flip side, is the massive amount of space and RAM required for the best sample libraries worth the "realism" by all those hundreds of round robins and 127 velocity levels?

 

I downloaded and installed the demo. It is a VST3 and can be found under Preparation. A real sound miracle.
I have attached a picture

Preparation by Physical Audio may just be the physical modelling synth you’ve been waiting for

https://musictech.com/news/preparation-audio-physical-modelling-synth-youve-been-waiting-for/

Preparation is available now at an introductory price of £69, before retailing at full price for £119.
Visit physicalaudio.co.uk to find out more and test Preparation for free in Demo Mode.

 

Modartt Pianoteq and MODO BASS are the most convincing ones for me.

 

Space - well, storage is getting incredibly cheap, especially NVMEs. You can find 1TB NVME drives from good manufacturers for about 100€ here. If you don't hoard libraries like I used to do you're probably gonna be fine with even 1TB, maybe 2 just to stay safe.
RAM - not as much of an issue as you think. I think the worst I've seen from Kontakt is 24GB after using a very excessive amount of libraries without purging the samples. It's tedious but I learned to always purge the unused samples.

 

SWAM, period.

 

You do not need massive Kontakt libraries to re-synthesize anything. Because it is sampled, the accuracy is built in by simply replaying the audio. It is not being calculated and in the depth a model is using the resources for.

You can change the render quality in Sculpture almost specifically only because of this (bottom left corner). Even that change is a big difference in system performance:

 

Somewhat unrelated but doesn't the Logic benchmark use a ton of Sculpture instances? I always found it to be completely useless (and frankly a bit irritating whenever it's brought up) as a benchmark. How does that reflect ANYONE's work scenario? I get it, it's supposed to be a synthetic benchmark. But it's way too arbitrary and it tells you NOTHING, unlike GPU benchmarks which are moderately useful at the very least.

 

I like this physical modelling chat. Very interesting. It got me to thinking - What part does it play in a professional's toolbox? Although I don't know for sure, I'm guessing it's found its way into creating film trailer music as well video games, commercials, pop and dance music, etc. Pianoteq and SWAM, however, are probably everywhere except jazz, classical and soundtrack albums. For instance, I bet donuts to dollars that the bigger film composers like John Williams either use real orchestras and pianos or stuff like Kontakt's Vienna libraries or Garritan's CFX concert grand piano.

 

I've pulled off really good stuff with SWAM saxes, but only with an almost literal shitload of tweaking and microediting. And processing. If it wasn't a project where I was obsessed with doing it all myself there would have been no justification fir not just getting someone to play sax. SWAM strings are nasty alone but make samples sound amazing if you blend then in. I like the Pianoteq upright the most. I love Lounge Lizard. MODO bass and drums suck ass imho.

 

Mimicing the human performance is arguably harder than the physical model of the instrument. Midi resolution maybe not enough bit depth, expression pedals and after touch aren't as responsive or elastic as a diaphragm.

It would be interesting to know how people are applying vibrato, expression and all the rest. Is anyone using a breath powered midi device? It'd be interesting to know if there are ways of improving the modelling via fiddling with various midi cc values or "riding the faders" type of attitude to previously performed midi track.