I wonder if some have a psychological barrier to accepting the possibility that modelling might create a good sound. Sampling is no less artificial if you think about it.
Talking about piano I believe it might be the case, at least a little bit.
The reason could be that when you think at a piano, you can have the impression that you could theoretically sample an "infinite" number of samples at different volumes and you would then think to have sampled basically every possible sound that instrument can make. You'll never think this way I.e. with a vilolin.
So one could think that the "best" vst will then be the one that has the biggest number of samples of the best possible recording quality.
And that would actually be the case if we were to choose the best piano vst at playing one note: with an infinite number of samples if we play "one note" we would actually hear a perfect recording of the piano playing "that" specific note and velocity, making it impossible to distinguish it from an actual recording of that very instrument playing that very note, which would actually exactly be.
But this changes after the second note is played, and I believe it's this that differentiates Pianoteq.
I think physical modelling is THEORETICALLY superior just as Artificial Intelligence is THEORETICALLY superior vs. i.e. a bot being programmed with a bazillion of possible answers to a bazillion of possible questions.
EDIT:
I naturally don't mean to question anyone's proficiency, it's just IMHO.
Last edited: