pieces that sound better as MIDIs?

[stevie]

alkan's le preux

most of liszt's grande etudes

possibly.

but yeah, in some cases its physically impossible for virtually all people to play the pieces in the best way, so the MIDI ends up sounding better.

[contrapunctus]

I like to listen to MIDIs for everything because I do not pick up on certain interpretations made by performers.

[tocca]

Eh?
I don't understand?

Instead of Midi, wouldn't the question rather be "What pieces sounds better when not played but notated in a program" or something like that.

That something is in Midi doesn't mean it hasn't been played by a Pianist!
I could hook up my Digital to the PC, record a performance as Midi and it'd be easily recognizable as mine even when played on a PC with a soundcard that's bad at reproducing sounds. (Making a Piano sound like... well not a Piano atleast).

I'm sure that 95% of all Midi (of Pianopieces) aren't played by a Pianist, but some are. Check out Classicalarchives. They have a lot of Midis which are mostly just recordings of Pianists, transfered to Midi to save serverspace.

Install a REALLY good soundcard (made for music) in your PC and it'll sound surprisingly close to the real recording.
Midi doesn't store every feeling and small nuance from a Pianist. It just checks the attack, delay, volume, fade and so on of each note. Meaning it will not sound exactly the same as a recording. But it's close enough to instantly recognize a certain Pianist (if you've got a soundcard good enough) so i wouldn't use Midi to "not pick up a Pianists interpretations".

[nicko124]

I have always thought that Gershwin - Prelude 1 sounds better as a Midi than any recording I have heard.

See for yourselves - https://www.empken.com/music/prelude1.mid

[prometheus]

A very big 

[stevie]

A very big 

right backatcha biatch 

[yoshiki]

For a computer typed midi, the notes are much clearly and the overall "performance" is very neat. However, it just can do the rubato properly.

[Dazzer]

Probably the ligeti etudes.

[pies]

Probably the ligeti etudes.

I must disagree. Aimard plays them very well.

[Stolzing]

I like to listen to MIDIs for everything because I do not pick up on certain interpretations made by performers.

I think 99% of the midis out there are recorded performances, not entered note by note.

[burstroman]

Probably most of Conlon Nancarrow's works. 

[Dazzer]

I must disagree. Aimard plays them very well.

But the fact that they are all VERY VERY mathematical pieces, would imply that MIDI would be best for an accurate performance. not that i'm PRO midi... and i've not heard aimard's recordings.

And if i'm not wrong, the last etude is written specifically for computer, and had a revised version so it could be playable by a human.

[pies]

But the fact that they are all VERY VERY mathematical pieces, would imply that MIDI would be best for an accurate performance. not that i'm PRO midi... and i've not heard aimard's recordings.

And if i'm not wrong, the last etude is written specifically for computer, and had a revised version so it could be playable by a human.

The last etude from book 2 was written for player piano, but Ligeti, in the notes for the etude, said that "with appropriate preparation, a performance by a live pianist is also possible."

I've heard a few of the etudes on player piano (Ligeti Project, Volume 5 I think) and still prefer the recordings by Aimard and Ullen.
I can post the mp3s if anyone is interested.

[thierry13]

The last etude from book 2 was written for player piano, but Ligeti, in the notes for the etude, said that "with appropriate preparation, a performance by a live pianist is also possible."

I've heard a few of the etudes on player piano (Ligeti Project, Volume 5 I think) and still prefer the recordings by Aimard and Ullen.
I can post the mp3s if anyone is interested.

I am VERY interested to hear them !! Please post them ! Would be amazing.

[odsum25]

Aimard definitely does justice to Ligeti's Etudes and plays as accurately as a midi.

[perfect_pitch]

But a lot of concertos can't properly give the feeling off the music, since it is digital music, we hear the notes correctly and the dynamics... But when you listen to a Proper MP3, you start to feel the emotion they are putting in to the piece as you are listening to it.

You don't get that on a MIDI!

[xvimbi]

But a lot of concertos can't properly give the feeling off the music, since it is digital music, we hear the notes correctly and the dynamics... But when you listen to a Proper MP3, you start to feel the emotion they are putting in to the piece as you are listening to it.

You don't get that on a MIDI!

But a lot of concertos can't properly give the feeling off the music, since it is digital music, we hear the notes correctly and the dynamics... But when you listen to a Proper orchestra, you start to feel the emotion they are putting in to the piece as you are listening to it.

You don't get that on an MP3!

[apion]

Tchaikovski's 1st PC 

[maul]

I think 99% of the midis out there are recorded performances, not entered note by note.

Wrong.

[tocca]

Here's an example how midi CAN sound, with the proper software.
This is a live recording of Robert Finley playing Chopins  Andante Spianato Polonaise. It's then been transfered to midi and some guy (at a sampler forum) has processed the midi with Garritans Piano sampler.

So this is a midirecording, played through a Pianosampler. There are better Pianosamplers out there, Garritans sampler is a part of an orchestra sampler. The specialed Grand Piano samplers, like Bosendorfer 290 or Steinway are better than this.

https://www.webalice.it/fatis12/files/AndePol.mp3

[perfect_pitch]

But a lot of concertos can't properly give the feeling off the music, since it is digital music, we hear the notes correctly and the dynamics... But when you listen to a Proper orchestra, you start to feel the emotion they are putting in to the piece as you are listening to it.

You don't get that on an MP3!

FUNNY!!! But an MP3 is clearly better than a Midi, and obviously seeing the concert in person is better than an MP3. It's just for all those americans who can go and see a concert whenever they damn well please... those of us in Australia, have nothing to do but rely on MP3's...

And that Andante Spaniosa may be a MIDI processed song, but it still doesn't beat a proper performance. The MP3 that tocca posted still sounds Processed, (obviously it is) but it is so obvious, that I can't listen to that sort of thing. uughhhh   

[JPRitchie]

MIDI can be played on acoustic pianos using a Disklavier/Opus7/Pianomation player, although the cost of such equipment is greater than that of a digital piano or software synth. But, when available, such equipment removes any sound quality issues in comparisons, allowing a full demonstration of MIDI capabilities.

MIDI, when properly programmed, renders rhythms as notated and plays all notes accurately regardless of tempo. So, compositions that are intended to be fast with intricate rhythms and harmonies can be rendered as notated. Syncopation, particularly, requires careful attention to the rhythm in order to achieve the full effect.

If a composer was involved in creation of player piano rolls before the reproducing piano (that is a piano capable of recording a manual performance on a paper roll) became available, that also suggests the MIDI would be of particular interest. Ealy rolls were punched by hand according to the composer's notation.

Scott Joplin's piano works fulfill the two criteria above. In fact, I made a CD of a select group of them from throughout his lifetime. It's now available at https://www.cdbaby.com/ritchie .  "Gladiolus Rag" among others is one piece that is rarely heard near the intended tempo of 100 qpm.

Organ and related works are also especially well-suited to MIDI, because the instrument lacks the expressive possibilities of a piano.

In fact, MIDI is inherently capable of rendering notated piano compositions more accuately than a human performance. But, some jazz pieces, for example, require a great deal of rubato in solo performance. Gershwin's "Rhapsody in Blue" is one example. Although rubato can be programmed, it's not notated very precisely; in such cases, the notated and intended performance can differ and MIDI doesn't have an inherent advantage.

Regards,
Jim Ritchie

[tocca]

And that Andante Spaniosa may be a MIDI processed song, but it still doesn't beat a proper performance. The MP3 that tocca posted still sounds Processed, (obviously it is) but it is so obvious, that I can't listen to that sort of thing. uughhhh   

Agree! It's not a substitute for a live performance, or for a CD or even an MP3.
The reason i posted was mainly as an answer to post 2 here... "I like to listen to MIDIs for everything because I do not pick up on certain interpretations made by performers."

In my view, the midi i posted is more than good enough to easily pick up interpretations by the performer.
The advantages and disadvantages of midi can be talked about forever (and they are too, in other forums). My experience is (often but not always): The more a person knows about midi, the less negative they are towards it.

[•ÇØM]

Scriabin: Etude Op. 42 no. 5

[hodi]

schumann sonata in g minor op.22 1st movement
much better on midi because this piece is FAST

[superstition2]

Prokofiev's Toccata Op. 11