Whadayathink of this piano sound?

[Kent Swafford]

Thanks, everyone, for listening to the piano files. I'm trying to find  
a good way to distribute audio files of piano tuning for students. It  
looks like 2 sets of files will be a good option -- MP3 files for  
most, and Apple Lossless files for those that want highest fidelity.

You know how there is the right way, the wrong way, and the Steinway?  
Now, add the Ron's-way! The piano in the recording is a Steinway B  
redesigned by Ron Nossaman. It is a very special piano. (I rescued it  
from a church some years back; it was a real dog. No longer.)


On Nov 28, 2007, at 10:11 PM, William R. Monroe wrote:
> I'm no recording engineer, but the treble sounds a bit punchy to  
> me.  Don't know if that's the piano or the miking.

  The hammers are Ronsen bacon felt; even so, it's still very easy to  
get it punched up too far.


On Nov 28, 2007, at 10:35 PM, David Ilvedson wrote:
> I couldn't tell any difference in the 2 formats ...not  equal  
> temperment though?

Well, no, it's not equal temperament -- but it's as close to equal as  
I can make it.   8^)


On Nov 29, 2007, at 12:00 AM, Richard Brekne wrote:
> Sounded reminicent of an older piano type in the first file.  Not  
> unpleasant at all... but a bit thin.  Unisons were kinda wavery.  
> Just listened to the first file one time quickly before leaving for  
> work this morning.  Cool blind test. It will be interesting to see  
> what it ends up being.

What did you have in mind when you said "older piano type"?


On Nov 29, 2007, at 1:36 AM, Jlmatt at aol.com wrote:
> On my computer the first file sounds like a digital piano.

Digital pianos are recordings, as this is, so the recording doesn't do  
the real instrument justice. If anyone wants to come by and hear the  
piano live, you are welcome. Just call ahead.  8^)


On Nov 29, 2007, at 5:03 AM, Phil Bondi wrote:
> 4.mp3 was my favorite 'sound'. To my ear it sounded like it was  
> recorded on a different day than the other samples.

I turned on the recorder and played everything all at one time, then I  
cut and pasted the pieces into separate files. That you liked 4 is a  
real surprise to me. It took me a while to make this piece "sound" on  
this piano. I finally voiced up the piano just a bit, and learned to  
play with very little pedal.

> This sound has more of a 'room' mic affect for me. I know you said  
> everything was close, but that's what I got from that sample.

You may be hearing the resonance of the piano with the dampers up. The  
great sustain of this instrument causes the pedal resonance to sound  
like electronic reverb; it can be a very dramatic sound.

> My least favorite was 2.mp3. To my ear, it was the least appealing,  
> and I love that style of play too, but didn't like that particular  
> recording.

A few notes need voiced down.


On Nov 29, 2007, at 6:01 AM, David Boyce wrote:
> Very nice.  Have only listened on laptop but will try through hifi  
> later. Piano sounds a bit Bosendorfer-ish to me in some of the tracks?
>
> Great idea to send sound samples, wish there were more so we could  
> hear pianos list members work with.  How nice to hear Randy newman's  
> exquisite little song "When She Loved Me" from Toy Story 2.  And  
> love the harmonies in The Bonny banks O' Loch Lomond. (You know  
> that's a terribly sad song?)

0 When She Loved Me, Randy Newman
1 To a Wild Rose, Edward MacDowell
2 Blue Sphere, Thelonius Monk
3 Simple Gifts, Marian MacPartland
4 Harlem Blues, Phineas Newborn, Jr.


On Nov 29, 2007, at 9:25 AM, Stéphane Collin wrote:
> I listened your files on Genelec 1030 studio monitors, and on this  
> kind of
> recording, I couldn't hear any difference between mp3 and lossless
> compression.  What quality of mp3 did you use ?

320 kb/s.

> That being said, there is some saturation at high volume on all your  
> files.
> Maybe your gain meters are not well calibrated, was it at record  
> time or at
> process time.  What do you use as recording device (or software) ?   
> The
> sound looks like quite natural though.  What microphones did you  
> use ?  You
> put them close to the bridge ?  Also, I'm sure there are cheap preamps
> around that reach a better signal to noise ratio, but this is not so
> important as the saturation thing.

OK, see the photo of my recording set-up.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 101_0185O.JPG
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 35395 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20071129/69e1a660/attachment-0001.jpe 
-------------- next part --------------



The recording was done with an iPod Nano, an iTalk, and a Sony stereo  
mic. I have been carrying this set-up around as a tech's field  
recorder. I put the mic in the same place on different pianos and can  
get a very good A/B comparison that can't be done easily any other  
way. This has helped me improve my voicing skills. Close miking is  
important because it minimizes the different room effects and keeps  
background noise down.

I can't hear the saturation, but then it is amazing this little set-up  
does as well as it does. 30 years ago I had "pro" equipment that  
couldn't make a recording anywhere near this good. The iPod with flash  
memory instead of a hard drive makes for a very quiet recorder.

So I carry a cell phone, a pocket PC for tuning, a digital camera, and  
now I don't go anywhere without my iPod field recorder.


Thanks so much!

Kent