Whadayathink of this piano sound?

[David Ilvedson]

In the first piece there seemed like a faster third than the rest, right at the beginning...oh well...

David Ilvedson, RPT
Pacifica, CA  94044

----- Original message ----------------------------------------
From: "Kent Swafford" <kswafford at gmail.com>
To: "Pianotech List" <pianotech at ptg.org>
Received: 11/29/2007 8:03:56 PM
Subject: Re: Whadayathink of this piano sound?


>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.




>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