Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Organteq 1.0 released! Physical modelling pipe organs.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Definitely as good a CPU you can or want to afford. Neither my PC nor my laptop meet their recommendations in terms of CPU. I can play the organ just fine, even tutti. It starts distorting or freezing when coupling everything together. Now, there might be just enough legroom for most playing scenarios of mine before running out of sufficient CPU cycles, but an i7 upwards would come in handy for larger dispositions probably.

    Comment


      #17
      Originally posted by jbird604 View Post
      ... while (2) Organteq needs far less disk space, and possibly less RAM, though we haven't been told that, but it needs a very fast and powerful CPU, perhaps about the fastest you can get your hands on.
      That’s correct. Although RAM usage in Organteq is very minimal—I just checked and it was 160MB Early in the beta testing I was recommended to use an I5-8259U or better. I went with the i7 Mac Mini just so I didn’t need to think about it.

      Originally posted by jbird604 View Post
      As to the question of either (1) reproducing the exact tones of a historic organ somewhere and hearing the precise acoustics of that cathedral or room VERSUS (2) creating one's own "complete" stop list and disposition...
      It’s not either/or with Organteq. Based on Pianoteq it could be assumed Modartt will sell complete organ dispositions/styles. Though reproducing lots of specific historic organs seems doubtful. Who knows though. My guess is that they’ll release other types too—Hammond, theatre, etc.

      I’ve been also using Friesach with GrandOrgue (I’ll phase that out when something comparable is released for Organteq), but I reorganised the stop layout better (in the ODF) for my console and would have really loved it if I could have reduced the reverb. Both of those actions are super easy on Organteq. I would have appreciated modifying some of the Friesach stops a bit too, and it hopefully not too much time that’ll be possible in Organteq with its own organs.

      You’re a tinkerer Jbird! With how easy that is in Organteq it’s hard for me to imagine you wouldn’t do that, even at home. Starting with an already decent organ, then altering it here and there as you see fit? Many of the people here would do that.
      Last edited by rjsilva; 12-01-2019, 02:41 PM.
      Viscount C400 3-manual
      8 channels + 2 reverb channels (w/ Lexicon MX200)
      Klipsch RSX-3 speakers and Klipsch Ultra 5.1 subwoofers

      Comment


        #18
        What always put me off to try big sample sets were the load times. That’s something a thing of the past with OrganTeq supposedly.

        Comment


        • rjsilva
          rjsilva commented
          Editing a comment
          On my computer with an i7-4770HQ and a fast SSD, Organteq loads in 8 seconds. Although that computer is somewhat underpowered for Organteq.

          On my Mac Mini with an i7-8700B and an even faster SSD, Organteq loads and is ready to play in 3 seconds.

        #19
        It does intrigue the tinkerer in me! That was one of the attractions of jOrgan when I was involved in that project, though I never got into the level of tinkering that many of the users did. As Organteq grows up, and with the suggestions that you are offering, more audio channels, and other enhancements, it ought to be a superb way to customize an organ to your liking. I'm looking forward to playing around with it.

        This comes at a good time for organ hobbyists, as the manufacturers of hardware organs continue to down-size in every way but price. It may well be that a virtual organ of some kind is in the future of every home organ player, as ready-made instruments soar out of our price range. I know there are a lot of good old hardware organs out there, but a lot of them are enormous and heavy, very hard to move and get into your house. And many will need a good deal of work to make them playable. A VPO is starting to sound more attractive to me all the time as my "ultimate" home organ, especially since I can't seem to find exactly what I want, and when I find one that I think is going to be my "forever organ," somebody comes along and buys it from me!
        John
        ----------
        Church: Allen MDS-45 with Allen MIDI-DIVISION-II expander
        Home: Rodgers Allegiant 677 with expanded four-channel audio
        Shop: Bunch of organs in varying conditions, some good, some not...
        Half of an incredible two-man organ service team -- servicing all the major digitals in Arkansas churches
        https://www.facebook.com/pages/Birds...97551893588434

        Comment


          #20
          I have been listening to the principal chorus and find that a note at 8' will sound great. Unfortunately when the 4' rank is added it sounds as if a parameter has been changed for the original note (the octave frequency) but it doesn't sound at all as if a second pipe is sounding. Same with adding the 2' rank. It is as if the same virtual tone generator is being used and that the three pipes being synthesized are all phase locked together. I cannot say that what it sounds like to me reflects what's actually happening in the Organteq software -- just trying to express what I hear. Does anyone else agree or disagree?

          I've considered getting involved as a beta tester. If only I could find time to really have a constructive input.

          I'm curious as well about performance when we get 30 or so completely independent stops. I run at a polyphony of about 6000 on Hauptwerk which is largely needed for the 80+ rank Goerlitz with direct, diffuse, and surround channel pairs. Organteq can avoid some of the polyphony requirements with their own reverb and their lack of the need for multiple samples and releases. Still, I suspect it will want a lot of CPU power before development goes much further.

          Don't misunderstand, I'm very impressed with Organteq at this early stage and am happy I sent them some money.
          http://www.kinkennon.com

          Comment


            #21
            Originally posted by jbird604 View Post
            somebody comes along and buys it from me!
            Right! I haven't had a playing console for most of this year.
            http://www.kinkennon.com

            Comment


            • jbird604
              jbird604 commented
              Editing a comment
              Now if I were to build myself a VPO, it would probably be too ugly to interest anyone else! Another advantage would be making it SUPER compact. If the console is nothing but a stand to hold the keyboard stack with a space below for the pedalboard, plus a shelf for the computer monitor, it can be quite a bit smaller than the most compact AGO consoles you can buy. A three-manual stack only needs to be about 16" deep, and the stand only has to be 54" wide (inside measure) to tuck an AGO pedalboard under it.

            #22
            Originally posted by John Kinkennon View Post
            ... It is as if the same virtual tone generator is being used and that the three pipes being synthesized are all phase locked together. I cannot say that what it sounds like to me reflects what's actually happening in the Organteq software -- just trying to express what I hear. Does anyone else agree or disagree?
            ...
            I'm curious as well about performance when we get 30 or so completely independent stops. I run at a polyphony of about 6000 on Hauptwerk which is largely needed for the 80+ rank Goerlitz with direct, diffuse, and surround channel pairs.
            Interesting thought! I haven’t noticed that but I’ll have a careful listen and test later tonight. I’ll also post some audio files so everyone can hear.

            On my i7-8700B I haven’t run into any polyphony issues so far. In the one Bach demo I posted I’m guessing it reaches 400+ notes at times. The built-in reverb definitely relieves the polyphony requirements compared to a sample set with a reverb tail.
            Viscount C400 3-manual
            8 channels + 2 reverb channels (w/ Lexicon MX200)
            Klipsch RSX-3 speakers and Klipsch Ultra 5.1 subwoofers

            Comment


              #23
              Originally posted by John Kinkennon View Post
              I have been listening to the principal chorus and find that a note at 8' will sound great. Unfortunately when the 4' rank is added it sounds as if a parameter has been changed for the original note (the octave frequency) but it doesn't sound at all as if a second pipe is sounding. Same with adding the 2' rank. It is as if the same virtual tone generator is being used and that the three pipes being synthesized are all phase locked together. I cannot say that what it sounds like to me reflects what's actually happening in the Organteq software -- just trying to express what I hear. Does anyone else agree or disagree?
              I felt that the demo tracks of full organ ensembles on the Organteq site sounded somewhat "pinched" to me and lacking in what jbird604 has called "transparency." What you conjecture would certainly be one explanation for this. The other thing I didn't like in some of the demos was the flutter. This is particularly noticeable in the first track "Presentation Music." I know that the intent is to model the air flow instability found in pipes, but this sounds more like a recording made on a cheap cassette recorder. I can't say I've ever heard a pipe organ with that amount of instability.

              The challenge of pulling off physical modeling on a PC is processing power. Organteq calls for a minimum of an i7 processor in their User Guide. While I suspect that while a physical model of a piano string might be more complex than a flue pipe, the scale of a pipe organ could easily be more taxing. It wouldn't surprise me if some compromises were made in order to pull this off.

              I hope to have time to download the trial version and explore in the next few days. I'm reserving judgement at least until then, but with the release of Hauptwerk 5 eminent, I'm going to have decide between a Hauptwerk upgrade or an Organteq purchase.
              Last edited by Admin; 12-02-2019, 03:35 PM. Reason: corrected spelling of Organteq
              -Admin

              Allen 965
              Zuma Group Midi Keyboard Encoder
              Zuma Group DM Midi Stop Controller
              Hauptwerk 4.2

              Comment


              • AllenAnalog
                AllenAnalog commented
                Editing a comment
                I agree with your initial observations. The flutter reminded me of an under-winded 1952 Estey pipe organ that was one of my practice instruments in college. I found it distracting and rather unmusical. While people used to playing old European tracker instruments, some with Barker machines, may relish the authenticity of fairly loud mechanical noises and wind instability, I think there is too much focus on that in this first version compared to making the initial speech and plenum sound as authentic as possible.

                I listen to many splendid new(er) tracker organs on YouTube and don't hear a lot of distracting mechanism sounds. Perhaps this product seeks to cater mainly to lovers of 18th and 19th century mechanical instruments, with all of their flaws and delights, in this first appearance,

                Let's face it, while individual stops may sound quite good by themselves on many electronic organs, the sound quality falls apart when they are played in ensemble. If you are going to need major processor horsepower just to do a modest size instrument with this software, it will discourage many people from trying it. Adding memory and disk space is relatively inexpensive these days. Buying a whole new computer for the sake of a faster processor is not.

                I think I'll wait until 2.0 comes out before thinking about testing this concept.

              #24
              Originally posted by John Kinkennon View Post
              I have been listening to the principal chorus and find that a note at 8' will sound great. Unfortunately when the 4' rank is added it sounds as if a parameter has been changed for the original note (the octave frequency) but it doesn't sound at all as if a second pipe is sounding ... It is as if the same virtual tone generator is being used and that the three pipes being synthesized are all phase locked together.
              I did some testing and can definitely verify this. But I'd encourage those here to not conclude too much from it. Just give Modartt feedback!
              Last edited by rjsilva; 12-02-2019, 07:43 PM.
              Viscount C400 3-manual
              8 channels + 2 reverb channels (w/ Lexicon MX200)
              Klipsch RSX-3 speakers and Klipsch Ultra 5.1 subwoofers

              Comment


                #25
                Originally posted by Admin View Post
                I felt that the demo tracks of full organ ensembles on the Organteq site sounded somewhat "pinched" to me and lacking in what jbird604 has called "transparency." ... The other thing I didn't like in some of the demos was the flutter.
                Don't you think your impression of the full ensemble is more likely due to the limited tonal resources of the included organ? Personally I think the 'full' organ on my Bach demo sounds pretty good (somewhere around 1:10 - https://soundcloud.com/user-65508924...h-excerpt-demo ). I'm not saying it's amazing but it's decent for a limited organ.

                Also keep in mind that Modartt felt they needed to get Organteq released before December (I think personal reasons were involved). And they aren't organists. They really need feedback from people like you. Many of the beta testers I came in contact with weren't organists either and I got into a couple of fights about various things they didn't understand. One person felt very strongly that Organteq needs to be freed of the 'shackles' of organ history and be made modern—which I assume means it should be used as a modern tone generator without all of the pesky things that make it an organ. Another thought Organteq should cater to non-organists first. Both of these people were intelligent and most likely capable musicians, they simply don't understand organs very well.

                I also wouldn't put too much weight on the jitter in the demo. Modartt went through various changes during the beta period and I think it's safe to say that will be included in the physical modelling controls when it's implemented.
                Viscount C400 3-manual
                8 channels + 2 reverb channels (w/ Lexicon MX200)
                Klipsch RSX-3 speakers and Klipsch Ultra 5.1 subwoofers

                Comment


                • Admin
                  Admin commented
                  Editing a comment
                  My initial thought was that the somewhat lifeless ensemble was due to lack of channelization. But John Kinkennon 's observation actually makes more sense as to its cause. Anyway, I didn't, and haven't, formed any firm conclusions about the ensemble sound at this time, but I don't think the size of the tonal resources has anything to do with my initial impression. The flutter, however, is far greater annoyance to me.

                  I've downloaded the trial version and intend to write a review when I've had the time to explore the program a bit.

                • musicmaker84
                  musicmaker84 commented
                  Editing a comment
                  While I’m just your run-off-the-mill organ player for a small congregation and get to play only a couple times a year nowadays, I appreciate good organ design and sound, but had to learn to make it work on less than stellar organs, pipe and electronic ones, throughout my player life. I can sympathize with “freeing the organ from it‘s shackles“: I don’t need blower noise emulation, mechanical sounds, clunky keyboards, cold church buildings; I don’t mind for theatre organs to be used as church organs; or a Wersi, Hammond, Synths, whatever the congregation feels good about. Wouldn’t mind to create unique stops within OrganTeq that defy a scholar‘s sense of what is right or wrong in organ design.

                #26
                Perhaps the most disturbing thing I discovered in the demos was the Celeste stops not being as live as I'm used to. I'm not sure if it is because the sounds are "phase locked" as described above, or if they're simply de-tuned too far apart, or if they're not very good samples. It would be fun to experiment with them, though to obtain a warmer Celeste sound.

                At times, the registrations used in the demos were a bit jarring, but at other times, I found myself thinking, "That's a rather nice sound." Of course, the Flutes sounded nice, but they are by far some of the easiest sounds to reproduce. The Diapasons and Strings are definitely more difficult to sample and reproduce well.

                The project has good potential, and I'm looking forward to seeing it progress and get better over time. RJ, thank you for starting this thread!

                Michael
                Way too many organs to list, but I do have 5 Allens:
                • MOS-2 Model 505-B / ADC-4300-DK / ADC-5400 / ADC-6000 (Symphony) / ADC-8000DKC
                • Lowrey Heritage (DSO-1)
                • 9 Pump Organs, 1 Pipe Organ & 6 Pianos

                Comment


                • AllenAnalog
                  AllenAnalog commented
                  Editing a comment
                  Michael, your references to "samples" does cloud the waters a bit in this discussion. Since this software does physical modeling rather than sample playback, I guess the question is what was the source of their model? Was it a sample of a given rank of pipes? Or did they make it out of whole cloth and say "this is what we think an 8' diapason should sound like."

                  Listening to pipe organs that were built as a result of a grand tonal plan that was carefully thought out by someone highly experienced in such matters is one thing. Listening to a collection of ranks of organ pipes from various builders that are under the control of a single console is another. I usually find that the latter instruments are much less successful as the registration builds.

                  Acknowledging that they are using a different software approach to create the audio than the sample-driven products, how do they create a cohesive stop list? If you do not originate your model from samples of an existing instrument, then you are, in essence, designing an organ from scratch. If they are not "organ people" then all of the brilliant software engineering in the world will not create a musically successful instrument and this product will remain a curiosity.

                • myorgan
                  myorgan commented
                  Editing a comment
                  Larry,

                  Thank you for the correction (samples vs. physical modeling). I'm so used to using the lingo I learned, it just slipped out!

                  This is quite an interesting thread to me, and i look forward to following its progress and possibly trying out the software at some point. I just have to retire (again) first!

                  Michael

                • rjsilva
                  rjsilva commented
                  Editing a comment
                  AllenAnalog, as I understand it, they were using a relatively local organ as tonal reference (I assume a Cavaillé-Coll). It’s doubtful the stoplist is identical. I tried to push them for certain stops, and they did add some.

                  In any case I don’t think it’s a nonsensical stoplist that is nothing more than a curiosity. It’s fine.

                #27
                It is not unheard of that pipe organ builders do not know how to play at all.

                Comment


                • myorgan
                  myorgan commented
                  Editing a comment
                  Good point! Your observation is related to the teachers/performers comment earlier in this thread (i think it was this thread).

                  Michael

                #28
                AllenAnalog commented:
                Acknowledging that they are using a different software approach to create the audio than the sample-driven products, how do they create a cohesive stop list? If you do not originate your model from samples of an existing instrument, then you are, in essence, designing an organ from scratch. If they are not "organ people" then all of the brilliant software engineering in the world will not create a musically successful instrument and this product will remain a curiosity
                Very good point. I believe the developers of the Bradford/Musicom system faced the same issue with their harmonic synthesis approach. My understanding is that they did spectral analysis of recorded samples and determined their synthesis parameters from that. The most successful organs built with the Musicom system were those of Copeman-Hart, but then Ernest Hart was an experienced builder and voicer.
                -Admin

                Allen 965
                Zuma Group Midi Keyboard Encoder
                Zuma Group DM Midi Stop Controller
                Hauptwerk 4.2

                Comment


                  #29
                  AllenAnalog makes a number of valid comments that resonated with me.

                  1. ...while individual stops may sound quite good by themselves on many electronic organs, the sound quality falls apart when they are played in ensemble.

                  2. Listening to pipe organs that were built as a result of a grand tonal plan that was carefully thought out by someone highly experienced in such matters is one thing. Listening to a collection of ranks of organ pipes from various builders that are under the control of a single console is another. I usually find that the latter instruments are much less successful....

                  3. ...how do they create a cohesive stop list? If you do not originate your model from samples of an existing instrument, then you are, in essence, designing an organ from scratch. If they are not "organ people" then all of the brilliant software engineering in the world will not create a musically successful instrument and this product will remain a curiosity.


                  His points apply to pipe organs as well as electronic ones. Organtec's efforts to offer an organ that the end user can modify sounds very exciting and I look forward to future iterations. That being said, I will reserve judgement until they are further along.
                  Bill

                  My home organ: Content M5800

                  Comment


                    #30
                    AllenAnalog’s thoughts are certainly excellent. How much they apply to Organteq is questionable. I suspect we all have heard pipe organs, even ones from reputable designers, that don’t inspire us. Perhaps Modartt consulted with an organ builder/designer, and maybe my stop suggestions were already in the works.

                    I’ve made a point about Modertt not being organists to point out they could use input from people who have a lot of experience with playing and experiencing organs. I wasn’t intending to say they don’t know what they’re doing in terms of the tonal design of an organ.
                    Viscount C400 3-manual
                    8 channels + 2 reverb channels (w/ Lexicon MX200)
                    Klipsch RSX-3 speakers and Klipsch Ultra 5.1 subwoofers

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X