Polished Recordings.

[iancollett6]

When a pianists has released a professional recorded album, how different is it compared to what was actually played?
 What Im saying is that even when I record myself using inexspensive amateur software, I can tweak and tune things to make the end result sound better. Im sure professionals with all their equipment and knowledge have a few tricks up their sleeve!
 

[j_menz]

I think it varies considerably. Some are relatively as played, with just a bit of sound quality touch up. Most are a splice job of the best bits of several performances, and some are pretty much complete fabrications (do five fast octaves, take a break, do the next 5.....)

[rachmaninoff_forever]

My teacher tells me they edit it to death. 

I remember he told me a story...

*Whole tone scale*

Teacher:  Hmmmm...  XYZ playing Petrouchka?  I'll buy it!

*clicks buy button*

*listens to it*

Teacher...  That...  Was...  BY FAR the best Petrouchka ever!!!  EVERYONE LISTEN TO THIS!!!  THIS IS INCREDIBLE!!!  This can end world hunger!  End all wars!  This can make Earth a utopia!!!  Ah, I see it now...

*daydreaming*

*a couple days later he finds out that the same pianist is playing it at a recital nearby*

Teacher:  I have to see it!!!

*He goes to the concert*

Teacher:...  That...  Was...  BY FAR the worst Petrouchka ever!!!  My ears are bleeding!!!  NOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!

...
...
...

He then entered a deep depression...  Until he met me of course!!!

*Whole tone scale*


Now that's what my teacher thinks of polished recordings.  He always tells me to never trust them.

[j_menz]

*Whole tone scale*

I thought you preferred a raised semitone in it.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

I thought you preferred a raised semitone in it.

...

...

...

Raised semitone...

Raiiised semitone...

Semitone...

Seeemitooone...

Raised semitone...

So it's raised and it's a semitone...

Raised semitone...

Semitone...

Semi...  So it's not full.

Tone...  So it's a tone...

Semitone...

Seeemiiitoooonnneee...


I'm sorry I don't know what that is... 

[j_menz]

Seeemiiitoooonnneee...


I'm sorry I don't know what that is... 

The Mystic Chord is a whole tone hexascale with one of the notes (what would have been G#) raised a semitone (to A).

[rachmaninoff_forever]

The Mystic Chord is a whole tone hexascale with one of the notes (what would have been G#) raised a semitone (to A).

Ugh...  I have no idea what the heck that means...

[j_menz]

Ugh...  I have no idea what the heck that means...

The Mystic Chord on C is comprised of the notes C, F♯, B♭, E, A, D.

That is, the notes C D E F# A Bb

A whole note scale starting on C is C D E F# G# A#

You will see that they are the same (allowing the A# to = Bb), except that the G# is raised a semitone (to now be A).

I had assumed you *whole note scale* references were somehow obliquely referencing that. I now don't know what the freaking heck you meant.

Aaaaarrrrrrrgggg! I've caught it! 

[rachmaninoff_forever]

I had assumed you *whole note scale* references were somehow obliquely referencing that. I now don't know what the freaking heck you meant.

Aaaaarrrrrrrgggg! I've caught it! 

EVERYONE knows that when you have flashbacks, you can hear an ascending whole tone scale, and when you come back to the present, you hear a descending whole tone scale!

Come on man, get with the program!

[j_menz]

EVERYONE knows that when you have flashbacks, you can hear an ascending whole tone scale, and when you come back to the present, you hear a descending whole tone scale!

Come on man, get with the program!

My vision just goes all wavy.

[iancollett6]

My teacher tells me they edit it to death. 

I remember he told me a story...

*Whole tone scale*

Teacher:  Hmmmm...  XYZ playing Petrouchka?  I'll buy it!

*clicks buy button*

*listens to it*

Teacher...  That...  Was...  BY FAR the best Petrouchka ever!!!  EVERYONE LISTEN TO THIS!!!  THIS IS INCREDIBLE!!!  This can end world hunger!  End all wars!  This can make Earth a utopia!!!  Ah, I see it now...

*daydreaming*

*a couple days later he finds out that the same pianist is playing it at a recital nearby*

Teacher:  I have to see it!!!

*He goes to the concert*

Teacher:...  That...  Was...  BY FAR the worst Petrouchka ever!!!  My ears are bleeding!!!  NOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!

...
...
...

He then entered a deep depression...  Until he met me of course!!!

*Whole tone scale*


Now that's what my teacher thinks of polished recordings.  He always tells me to never trust them.

 Well thankyou rachmaninoff_forever!! that makes me feel a whole lot better about my own playing!

[chopin2015]

The Mystic Chord is a whole tone hexascale with one of the notes (what would have been G#) raised a semitone (to A).

how many cents is a semitone?

[awesom_o]

I think there are a lot of misunderstandings flying around here about what editing can and can't do.

[ajspiano]

how many cents is a semitone?

100.

Rach4, please tell me that that was some kind of weird rubbish and that you do know what a semitone is.

I think there are a lot of misunderstandings flying around here about what editing can and can't do.

I think its capable of doing a lot, how ever - the whole play 5 notes fast, play another 5 notes fast.. stitch everything together type approach doesnt really hold up for me - at least not on a piano.

[awesom_o]

Our surgeons can only do so much... if you're stitching only 5 notes together at a time, even the best of the best can only make a Frankenstein. 500 notes at a time, that's a different story.

Still, it's more like patching up a worn jacket with a few holes here and there rather than sewing one from scratch out of chinchilla pelts.

[j_menz]

Rach4, please tell me that that was some kind of weird rubbish and that you do know what a semitone is.

I think the sentence as a whole was the problem, in the "I know all the words, but HUH??" sense.

I think its capable of doing a lot, how ever - the whole play 5 notes fast, play another 5 notes fast.. stitch everything together type approach doesnt really hold up for me - at least not on a piano.

Perhaps an exaggeration, but not a huge one. The secret is to overlap the passages and fade in/out to maintain background resonance. It requires, as you could imagine, great patience, but that seems a necessary virtue in a sound engineer anyway.

[ajspiano]

Our surgeons can only do so much... if you're stitching only 5 notes together at a time, even the best of the best can only make a Frankenstein. 500 notes at a time, that's a different story.

Perhaps an exaggeration, but not a huge one. The secret is to overlap the passages and fade in/out to maintain background resonance. It requires, as you could imagine, great patience, but that seems a necessary virtue in a sound engineer anyway.

I've stitched together guitar parts phrase by phrase before, never piano though - its too hard to get a really good sense of continuity in anything shorter than entire sections. Pedal significantly complicates the matter also.

Patience certainly would be required, I'm not sure that word alone really describes the required discipline though.

[awesom_o]

I've stitched together guitar parts phrase by phrase before, never piano though - its too hard to get a really good sense of continuity in anything shorter than entire sections. Pedal significantly complicates the matter also.

Yeah-pedal makes many situations un-editable. Also, the peculiar nature of rubato in piano music and the extreme organic complexity of the tonal image make editing far from the magic-eraser that some people seem to think it is.

[j_menz]

I've stitched together guitar parts phrase by phrase before, never piano though - its too hard to get a really good sense of continuity in anything shorter than entire sections. Pedal significantly complicates the matter also.

Patience certainly would be required, I'm not sure that word alone really describes the required discipline though.

I seem to recall someone actually did it sometime in the early 1980's. Aim was to achieve a "fastest set of octaves in the west" reputation on a particular piece. I doubt musical integrity was uppermost in their mind.  No concrete details, though, so may be mis-remembered hearsay.

[ajspiano]

I seem to recall someone actually did it sometime in the early 1980's. Aim was to achieve a "fastest set of octaves in the west" reputation on a particular piece. I doubt musical integrity was uppermost in their mind.  No concrete details, though, so may be mis-remembered hearsay.

I'll admit that on the CD I presented as a prize in the competition, there is a small excerpt from the simpsons theme played on solo guitar at the end which includes a fast run that I 'cooked up' in groups of 4 semiquavers. My teenage peers were thoroughly impressed and easily convinced.

If I'd had the patience to do the whole thing I may have really turned some heads.

..I also auto-tuned my voice for 1 single note (it was about a 4th below my vocal range). No one seemed to notice that either.

[chopin2015]

Really, it takes just as much time to just work on getting the notes right as it would to edit every 5 notes.

[awesom_o]

Really, it takes just as much time to just work on getting the notes right as it would to edit every 5 notes.

It depends, really. Some extremely difficult pieces, like Chopin op. 10/1 take a full decade or more to ever 'master' in the sense of being able to make a definitive recording, edits or no.

You could write your own set of etudes in that amount of time. And recording that etude 5 notes at a time just wouldn't work because of the complex pedaling.

[chopin2015]

It depends, really. Some extremely difficult pieces, like Chopin op. 10/1 take a full decade or more to ever 'master' in the sense of being able to make a definitive recording, edits or no.

You could write your own set of etudes in that amount of time. And recording that etude 5 notes at a time just wouldn't work because of the complex pedaling.

yeah, I think unedited performances have a living element that can't be faked. Sure, pedaling is one of the elements. But in classical music, expression is sometimes an improvised element that can't be faked, I think. I think an edit interrupts flow, even if it is a good, professional edit where phase and amplitude match and so do the wavelengths. I mean, have you ever beat detected drums, in protools? That is pretty complex but you can come up with a passable result. But you can't mic and isolate each string on the piano...so, I really doubt a live piano recording would be worth editing extensively. But enhancing the timbre of the instrument or...you know, closing the envelope a little (like the decay and delays...) can be helpful in recording, and I do mean the musician! The piano sounds different when you are playing it as opposed to being somewhere near a piano that is being played, or listening to a recording....But now I really am just going off...

[ajspiano]

You can't mic and isolate each string on the piano...

No..  but a live midi recording on a DP, with a sampled piano library is coming a lot closer than it used to be capable of. I personally don't like playing on these, but that could be more of a result of my PC's limited capability than the product itself.

And, in a midi sensor fitted real piano, and the improving quality of how we reproduce sympathetic resonance in these situations we may be getting VERY close indeed to having that facility

I think the sample libraries still have a way to go though so far as capturing a realistic tonal range that genuinely translates to a DP in the same way as it responds on the original instrument.

[chopin2015]

No..  but a live midi recording on a DP, with a sampled piano library is coming a lot closer than it used to be capable of. I personally don't like playing on these, but that could be more of a result of my PC's limited capability than the product itself.

And, in a midi sensor fitted real piano, and the improving quality of how we reproduce sympathetic resonance in these situations we may be getting VERY close indeed to having that facility

I think the sample libraries still have a way to go though so far as capturing a realistic tonal range that genuinely translates to a DP in the same way as it responds on the original instrument.

gag me with a spoon!

 I know that computers can simulate any venue and any piano. But my personal discovery is that I have more range in terms of tone and sounds more musical on a bigger piano such as a grand, opposed to an upright. So it is good to play on an upright and then record on a grand piano. But a simulated space and piano still have at least a delay in quality, because it is not real time, it is digital. And the keyboard will not have the action of a live instrument, so that affects the performance already...but you have a good idea. it would be easier to get the same results of a heavy touch, powerful steinway with less effort, on a midi instrument.

[ajspiano]

And the keyboard will not have the action of a live instrument, so that affects the performance already...but you have a good idea.

Thats why I said a midi fitted piano at one point. You can have midi sensors fit underneath you real acoustic piano's keys. So you play on a real piano, with real piano sound coming out..  but the performance is also recorded as midi at the same time - so it can then also be rendered through a sampled piano.

This ofcourse creates differentiations though, where your piano responds differently to the way the sampled one does.. effecting the performance..

[chopin2015]

Thats why I said a midi fitted piano at one point. You can have midi sensors fit underneath you real acoustic piano's keys. So you play on a real piano, with real piano sound coming out..  but the performance is also recorded as midi at the same time - so it can then also be rendered through a sampled piano.

Can you do that to any piano? and the pedal, I know you can control that, too.

[ajspiano]

Can you do that to any piano? and the pedal, I know you can control that, too.

"The MIDI Controller Retrofit System will turn virtually any acoustic piano into a MIDI Controller."
https://www.pianodisc.com/midi-controller-retrofit-system/

pedal functions are included.

[chopin2015]

"The MIDI Controller Retrofit System will turn virtually any acoustic piano into a MIDI Controller."
https://www.pianodisc.com/midi-controller-retrofit-system/

pedal functions are included.

That's insane! I don't understand.

 doesn't it still have a separate response than a piano, though? It's midi for duck's sake! I suppose the pedal and on/off is more flexible, but midi is not sexy!

Midi has a note limit, depending on which software you are running. In piano, all strings work at all times, in a very minor, supple way which creates music. Midi is more simple than an acoustic piano. It takes a lot of things that happen subconsciously or instinctively at the piano, and gets rid.

[ajspiano]

That's insane! I don't understand.

 doesn't it still have a separate response than a piano, though? It's midi for duck's sake! I suppose the pedal and on/off is more flexible, but midi is not sexy!

Midi has a note limit, depending on which software you are running. In piano, all strings work at all times, in a very minor, supple way which creates music. Midi is more simple than an acoustic piano. It takes a lot of things that happen subconsciously or instinctively at the piano, and gets rid.

Midi sensors can pick up up to 127 different levels of input, its not an on/off switch. This applies to the pedals and all keys. They fit an individual sensor under every single key. Realistically this means that a sampled piano can provide 127 different tonal/dynamic variations per key, they can also sample with una corda (which will be an on/off) as well so thats 254 levels of tonal variation.

Midi can also handle up to 128 notes simultaneously, thats more than the piano has. The complications are in resonance applied to repeated notes with pedal so realistically the piano can need well into the hundreds of notes pretty quickly. However, these days pedal resonance can be also "modelled" on the software side, based on the strings of midi data. The same way reverb is basically, but the algorithms are no doubt a lot more complex and PC intensive.

In short, it can already provide a fairly accurate representation of what the pianist did.. its the rendering of the data that needs some work still.

..though I am fairly dubious about the real subtle variances in tone from a real piano and whether the effects of different pianistic techniques can be realistically picked up on and rendered effectively.

[chopin2015]

Midi sensors can pick up up to 127 different levels of input, its not an on/off switch. This applies to the pedals and all keys. They fit an individual sensor under every single key. Realistically this means that a sampled piano can provide 127 different tonal/dynamic variations per key, they can also sample with una corda (which will be an on/off) as well so thats 254 levels of tonal variation.

Midi can also handle up to 128 notes simultaneously, thats more than the piano has. The complications are in resonance applied to repeated notes with pedal so realistically the piano can need well into the hundreds of notes pretty quickly. However, these days pedal resonance can be also "modelled" on the software side, based on the strings of midi data. The same way reverb is basically, but the algorithms are no doubt a lot more complex and PC intensive.

In short, it can already provide a fairly accurate representation of what the pianist did.. its the rendering of the data that needs some work still.

..though I am fairly dubious about the real subtle variances in tone from a real piano and whether the effects of different pianistic techniques can be realistically picked up on and rendered effectively.

Interesting. Although I think it is a little more difficult than just how many values each key can output and what not...and sure, the keyboard may be able to output 128 notes, but many software instruments and programs can only process a as little as 16 notes simultaneously which really limits the possibilities, deeming a live instrument more capable of spontaneity...
 But most pop music does not need to use an acoustic and all elements a great acoustic piano makes available to classical pianists.

[ajspiano]

www.native-instruments.com/en/products/komplete/keys/alicias-keys/?content=1145

this was perhaps designed with pop in mind.. but really its not bad solo.. maybe not good enough, but it is good.

[ajspiano]

https://www.imperfectsamples.com/website/samples/fazioliconcertgrand/fazioligrand_extreme.php
https://www.imperfectsamples.com/website/samples/braunschweig/braunschweiguprightpiano_pro.php
https://www.imperfectsamples.com/website/samples/steinwayconcertgrand/steinway_extreme.php

The demo's for these also sound pretty good.. and perhaps a little more realistic to what you'd get out of a real recording situation. The upright here was really cool I think.

[awesom_o]

yeah, I think unedited performances have a living element that can't be faked. Sure, pedaling is one of the elements. But in classical music, expression is sometimes an improvised element that can't be faked, I think. I think an edit interrupts flow, even if it is a good, professional edit where phase and amplitude match and so do the wavelengths. I mean, have you ever beat detected drums, in protools? That is pretty complex but you can come up with a passable result. But you can't mic and isolate each string on the piano...so, I really doubt a live piano recording would be worth editing extensively. But enhancing the timbre of the instrument or...you know, closing the envelope a little (like the decay and delays...) can be helpful in recording, and I do mean the musician! The piano sounds different when you are playing it as opposed to being somewhere near a piano that is being played, or listening to a recording....But now I really am just going off...

I don't think you could tell where the edits in my recordings are, or what type of edits they were.    Not unless you are a professional audio engineer yourself. And even then, you'd probably have to listen over and over and LOOK for them. My guy is really good.
The timbre of the instrument itself needed no enhancement (Steinway D in meticulous condition) but my engineer did tweak the sound subtly to better simulate a recording space (our ceilings in the room weren't high and the acoustics weren't great). You are absolutely correct that edits can interrupt the flow in piano music. We typically do not play a piece the same way twice, even when we think we do. So different takes often don't line up nearly as well as you want them to.

[iansinclair]

This is one of THOSE topics.  Ask five different people and you will get ten different opinions...

In my humble opinion, though, how much tweaking is done -- and how much tweaking is desirable -- is very much a matter of what do you -- the artist (or in many cases, sadly, the producer, who may or may not be a philistine or a musician...) wants the final result to sound like.  If what you want is the ultimate polished performance, not a mistake anywhere with every note precisely the volume and duration you want, etc. etc., then it is likely that good deal of tweaking and editing may be in store -- even to the extent of running the thing through a MIDI system, which is in the end a very fancy computer output with a rather complex input device and a complex program in there.

On the other hand, if what you are looking for is the feel and excitement of a live performance, then... there ain't no substitute for a live performance.

They both have their place.

If you should have the incredibly good fortune to have a very good high fidelity sound system, with a superb turntable, and access to a good clean copy (not played to death!) of some of the early Mercury Living Presence or London FFRR recordings, you can hear a completely untweaked, live performance in all its glory -- and there is nothing like it.  Both of those series were recorded with a single (one!) very high quality microphone over, but slightly behind, the conductor, onto 15 or 30 inch per second single full track half inch reel to reel tapes, and then transcribed to disc without compression.  Modern recordings may be slightly better technically -- but with those, you are there.  The only experience which is better is a really good seat in a good concert hall.

[chopin2015]

Oh...ya, I forgot that a top-notch studio could probably just sample the piano they have and the space and edit any piano solo recording by automating the volume of the mistake lower, and inputting midi that is a perfect match to the piano and space that was recorded, by using the live samples...but that sounds like it would have to be something you already mess with on a regular basis. Otherwise, the whole procedure could take a while before great results can be achieved.

[awesom_o]

Oh...ya, I forgot that a top-notch studio could probably just sample the piano they have and the space and edit any piano solo recording by automating the volume of the mistake lower, and inputting midi that is a perfect match to the piano and space that was recorded, by using the live samples...but that sounds like it would have to be something you already mess with on a regular basis. Otherwise, the whole procedure could take a while before great results can be achieved.

.........

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Oh...ya, I forgot that a top-notch studio could probably just sample the piano they have and the space and edit any piano solo recording by automating the volume of the mistake lower, and inputting midi that is a perfect match to the piano and space that was recorded, by using the live samples...but that sounds like it would have to be something you already mess with on a regular basis. Otherwise, the whole procedure could take a while before great results can be achieved.

The mistake will have also harmonics. It's not as simple as eliminating one frequency and replacing it with a midi note. The frequency of the mistake may also be a harmonic of a lower note.

..

In any case, your editing procedure should be a mechanism for performing cosmetic surgery on minor details: if you haven't achieved a certain basic competence you have no business making a recording. And if you want to use midi right left and centre, just enter it via a computer rather than play it, cut out the middle-man!

Yeah-pedal makes many situations un-editable. Also, the peculiar nature of rubato in piano music and the extreme organic complexity of the tonal image make editing far from the magic-eraser that some people seem to think it is.

Oh yes, that glorious situation in which small variations in pedalling between takes result in notes coming in and out of the texture when you try to edit them together!

[awesom_o]

  Everything said in the post above is spot on, 100%.

[chopin2015]

The mistake will have also harmonics. It's not as simple as eliminating one frequency and replacing it with a midi note. The frequency of the mistake may also be a harmonic of a lower note.

..

In any case, your editing procedure should be a mechanism for performing cosmetic surgery on minor details: if you haven't achieved a certain basic competence you have no business making a recording. And if you want to use midi right left and centre, just enter it via a computer rather than play it, cut out the middle-man!


Oh yes, that glorious situation in which small variations in pedalling between takes result in notes coming in and out of the texture when you try to edit them together!

I never said eliminate, did I?
I didn't think I would have to say the M word, but I was talking about automating volume and adding layers of-not just any midi to audio signal-but something that can help mask the signal.
 It is just an idea. Not a suggestion nor a view point on how things have to be done...

Besides, I think it takes a realistic expectation of what needs to be done on behalf of performer and engineer. A professional pianist will know what to demand to enhance the work atmosphere to where the musician can achieve the best naturally aesthetic results. Then an engineer uses his(or her) highly-trained ear to fine-tune the recording in a way that adds to the recording, not take away. Everything that "fix it later" is a bad way to approach things, yes. You need to get rid of everything you would later cut, while in the studio.

[ronde_des_sylphes]

I never said eliminate, did I?
I didn't think I would have to say the M word, but I was talking about automating volume and adding layers of-not just any midi to audio signal-but something that can help mask the signal.
 It is just an idea. Not a suggestion nor a view point on how things have to be done...

I think what you're talking about is pretty much an emergency scenario. In my experience - I wouldn't claim to be an expert, but I have made a CD recently - by the time you've got to the studio, you should ideally have at least one take where any questionable passage is close to perfect, then be able to splice together various selections of takes: though in the heat of the moment it's possible some small errors slip though. There is a product called Melodyne which in theory claims to be able to (for example) break down the sound into its constituent components and allow you to resynthesise it with "corrected" notes. My engineer did try it in a couple of places but it wasn't particulaly effective and I suspect it's more suited to vocal recordings. In more general terms, it's just easier and less time-consuming to take a little extra time during recording to ensure you have one+ decent take (I had SEVEN HOURS of takes for 65 mins of music), than to sit in the studio trying to electronically manipulate the end result.

[chopin2015]

I think what you're talking about is pretty much an emergency scenario. In my experience - I wouldn't claim to be an expert, but I have made a CD recently - by the time you've got to the studio, you should ideally have at least one take where any questionable passage is close to perfect, then be able to splice together various selections of takes: though in the heat of the moment it's possible some small errors slip though. There is a product called Melodyne which in theory claims to be able to (for example) break down the sound into its constituent components and allow you to resynthesise it with "corrected" notes. My engineer did try it in a couple of places but it wasn't particulaly effective and I suspect it's more suited to vocal recordings. In more general terms, it's just easier and less time-consuming to take a little extra time during recording to ensure you have one+ decent take (I had SEVEN HOURS of takes for 65 mins of music), than to sit in the studio trying to electronically manipulate the end result.

right, yeah-maybe the melodyne is supposed to be for directional instrument recordings where the recording picked up other instruments or sound of the room. I don't think it would work as well "within" the instrument. Check out Structured Sparsity for Audio signals.

[richard black]

Speaking as a recording editor as well as a pianist, I can tell you it varies A LOT. Some discs go out with not much more than a dozen butt-splice edits in. Some have hundreds. Some have other jiggery-pokery besides. I'm just now working on one (me playing, as it happens, but under very detailed direction from the composer) where speeds of sections have been altered, a couple of missed notes have been added, timing has been fiddled with, various other things I've already forgotten about. I don't care, I just do what I'm told. If it makes someone happy that's good enough for me.

And if anyone's interested, studio time was about 8 hours (including setting up, which I do very quickly, and a short lunch break), and editing time has so far been about 20 hours with maybe a couple more to go.

Incidentally, before someone says 'you should have practised more' (which is a fair point, of course: quite a few edits are simply eliminating wrong notes and smudges), I can honestly say that a surprising number of 'in' takes turn out to be my first playing. Subsequent takes, after the composer had made his suggestions, ended up being rejected by him on hearing the raw takes a week or three after the sessions. But he's a nice guy and writes nice music and I'm not inclined to make a thing of it.