Chopin - Scherzo No.1

[quantum]

Mic: (2x) Studio Projects B1
Interface: Edirol UA-25
Reverb: Adobe Audition preset - Medium Concert Hall Crisp
Piano: Yamaha C3

Enjoy!

[erak]

I just listened to this, good job, but I'll write a better review or something later if I can .


I just wanted to point out one reading mistake, you seem to always play this note wrong. In the first ascending double note run (the son of a b*tch thing) you always seem to play a wrong note right before the ending b, I have no idea which one it is because I don't have such great ears, but you always play a wrong note. Or not, but I'm quite sure you do:). (if my memory serves me right and I can count, the run I mean starts in measure 13)

[piano121]

Hi Quantum, This is a very nice recording. BTW, every thing you post here got a high standard, booth on interpretation, as well as on sound quality.

question: along with your equipment, it it absolutely nescessary to have a better sound card to capture it? Or just teh Edirol works fine no mater the sound card?

Keep up the good work.

[zheer]

That was really well playd. Its intresting haw you like to improvize a lot, but the pieces which you learn by other composers sound very planed and studied. It would be intresting to know haw your piano playing would change if playd under pressure.
You play in a very professional way, thanks for posting.

[henrah]

Awesome playing Quantum, really really nice


It's odd to hear what that Miss Texas runner-up was trying to play...>_<
Henrah

[el nino]

what about the tempo?

[quantum]

Erak, yes indeed that is a wrong note.  You have good ears to catch it.  I was playing an A instead of B.  I knew it was supposed to be a B and play it that way in slow practice, but for some reason I hit A when I sped it up.  I am working to fix it now.

Piano121, the Edirol connects via USB and takes over all sound operations when it is plugged in.  So whatever sound card you have in your computer doesn't affect quality.  When you unplug the Edirol, the sound card works normally.  Another thing I like about it is that you can easily plug it in to different computers both PC and Mac. 

Zheer, I guess I could say that my choice of composed works plus my improvisations compliment and contrast each other.  When I study and learn a work by a composer I like to be very detailed and bring out as much in the music as possible.  Due to influences from teachers from childhood (not only music teachers) I was encouraged to put quality into my work, and that philosophy carried with me. 

My improvisations show a side of me that likes to be creative and also my interest in composition.  I often like doing things that I don't play in my learned pieces, plus I like experimenting on new ways to use the piano. 

Thanks all for listening and commenting. 

[steve jones]

I think this recording sounds great. The playing is lovely, but the recording is top notch!

Maybe you should become a tracking engineer aswell Quantum?  You've really captured the bottom end nicely.

Well done on a double fine performance

[erak]

Hehe, I have the same problem with the 2nd run, I always play an A instead of a B there when I sped it up . I eventually got rid of it, but once you forget you ever played that wrong, the A comes back. Luckily the second time it's not as noticable since you have to jump to that E, in the first run the ninth is just very ugly to hear.

[crazy for ivan moravec]

wow, interesting. i would consider this a personal interpretation of yours.

i don't like it, hehe, sorry about that.

but it's simply great how creative you get with this playing. contrary to what was said, i think this is quite improvisational in approach... well-planned but you make it sound that it wasn't.

the tempo is quite original.

i love your sound.

it's intellectual, at the same time, there are moments when passion takes over esp with the slow section.

if there was one suggestion i'd make, it might be some changes in character. i think you can experiment more on that. sometimes the feeling is quite heavy all throughout... but then again, that's your interpretation and im sure you know very well why you do those things.

don't get me wrong. it's not because i don't like your interpretation, coz that's just my taste. i think it's great playing, a great and original concept. i have always found your interpretations to be musically on a high level.

congratulations! thank you for posting.

-crazy

[letters]

its beautiful! and a great quality of recording, its only my crappy speakers have let u down! hehe

[bearzinthehood]

Always a pleasure quantum.

[steve jones]

Btw, Quantum, you might be interested to know that there are various VST plugins that enable to user to 'convolve' audio with an impulse response (usually taken from live acoustic environments).

What does this mean?

Essentially, you can position your recording in the finest concert halls our little world has to offer!

Convolution reverbs are not perfect, but they offer the most convincing 'natural' reverbs anywhere. I have a plugin by a company called Waves that includes impulse responses from a variety of concert halls, recording studios and other acoustic spaces - they sound great on dry piano recordings!

https://www.waves.com/content.asp?id=1564

There are also freeware versions of this software, though you have to find the IR's yourself.

Check this out:

https://s56.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=1DNS2DI9VEQ3T2CJMW192MO5QX

This is an example featuring a bit of big B's Moonlight with and without reverb. The verb itself is from an IR of the Sydney Opera House. I think it sounds just about as close as you're ever going to get!

Anyway, bit OT, but I thought you might be interested as this could take your (already great) recordings up a notch.


Steve Jones


PS. I didnt get permission to use the sample, and its from this forum. So apologies in advance if it's yours!

[quantum]

Crazy, I think I know what you mean by more changes in character.  I try to work out more of that. 

Steve Jones, are you involved in the recording industry?  Thanks for the tips.  I'd love to do recordings on the side, only thing is I've never had any formal training in that respect.  You've got me interested in this convolution reverb thing.  I've been googling around and downloaded SIR and some free IR's. 

[steve jones]

Hey Quantum,

Yeah, I am a freelance sound designer (at the moment!). So I have to spend stupid amounts of time working with these mad programs, figuring out how to get them sounding their best. Convolution is actually a technique that we were using in Csound ages ago, making weird filter effects. But more recently, developers have been using convolution to create realistic reverberations.

Essentially, the IR in this context is 'response' of an acoustic space to a sudden impulse. Usually they are made using one of two techniques - with a 'spike' (like a clap, or a gunshot) or a 'sweep' (usually a sine waves gradually swept through the auditory range). The resulting recording is then 'deconvolved' using a computer program.

Anyway, the IR contains the acoustic character of an acoustic space. The sweet thing is that this doesnt have to be a real one, you can record IR's from artifical reverb processors as well. So many people sample IR's from expensive hardware processors, check out this link https://www.noisevault.com/index.php.

SIR is the standard freeware convoverb. I think it sound perfectly adequate although I know some people who think it lacks something of the commerical versions. I like Voxengo's Pristine Space. This one is cheap, sounds great and has plenty of functionality. Waves IR1 is also good, and comes with loads of free IR's. Altiverb for the Mac also has plenty of free IR's, and the library is constanty growing.

To be honest though, SIR is great and for free you cant grumble. Maybe the FFT algorithms arent QUITE a good as though in the Waves and Altiverb, but its really all down to the quality of the IR's. Thats the real deciding factor.

Btw, if you have Sound Forge you can do convolution in that. Its possible that Audicity can do it aswell, and that editor is freeware (and superb!).

Sorry, I am a total geek for this kind of stuff. Dont get me started... 

SJ

PS. You dont need formal training to be a sound engineer. Its all about experience. A little techy knowledge is required, but not much. Knowing the instrument, acoustic space and recording equipment is the main thing. If you can get a good sound, then thats all that matters. Judging by your own recordings, you certainly have the knack as they sound very good to my ears.

Do a search on Google and you'll find loads of info on audio engineering. The 'Sound on Sound' site is a good resource as they archieve LOADS of old articles covering everything from mic placement to DSP processing.

[art]

hi i just have time to listen a little and it's very good. If i have the time tomorrow i will post my recording too to compare with your. I must go now