Jose EB5AGV the good thing is that we are just a couple clicks away from playing a pristine modern Steinway D, or a 1887 vintage one, as an example.
That’s absolutely right. We are indeed fortunate having access to many different virtual pianos. 😃
Vlad This thread is getting way out of hand for me! I'll let you guys continue...
This is a regional statistic. Worldwide I bet no one would desire Ferrari before any other more practical yet luxury vehicle of SUV type such as Porsché or sedan types (Lexus or Mercedes). If you meant amongst sports oriented, wealthy people then maybe it is Ferrari.
Statistic is very regional especially regarding people measure (preferences). No one has proven such statistic is valid globally. Even in modern era of information reaching people in seconds.
Mercedes (globally) would beat Ferrari anytime (can not prove it, just my gut feeling\estimation).
What is the most desired piano (acoustic)? Is it Steinway or is it just marketing hype?
Vlad All we need is…
Food and… water (preferably running and warm too).
I would add electricity too. Without it 99% of our occupations (jobs) will be a disastrous chore. Even preparing a meal (food).
PASHKULI Acoustic pianos are difficult to record (properly): you need good and well acoustically treated room (studio), great mics, mix of recorded signals (phase correlation especially, EQ tweaking, recording device as audio interface and recorder, typically laptop with such audio software). Not many piano players have such setups.
Hence, most of them dream about it. Others have it (in house, at the school music hall) but the hassle of recording is too much.
I don't know. I made this recording of an acoustic piano in a church I was serving in 7 years ago. It wasn't that difficult. Couple mics, my laptop, an audio interface, and I uploaded it right from that sanctuary. Maybe it's not considered properly done, but I think it accurately captures what that piano sounded like in that space at that time. I remember it was in the winter and very cold in that sanctuary. My fingers felt like they never warmed up.
God Bless,
David
David B It's not difficult to record, but to record well requires effort and skill. And fortunately, sample library makers know how to do it.
David Lai It's not difficult to record, but to record well requires effort and skill. And fortunately, sample library makers know how to do it.
If I could afford it and had the space for an acoustic piano, I'm pretty confident I could get decent recordings out of it. I would not attempt to sample the piano to make a virtual instrument out of it, but I think recording music with it would be fairly simple once I got it setup right. There are all kinds of good acoustic piano recordings on YouTube by amateurs. I don't think it's as complicated as @PASHKULI makes it out to be.
If I was making an album or was a professional musician, I'd rather record a real acoustic piano rather than use a virtual recording of one. The irony is that I'm certain I can't always tell the difference between an actual acoustic or virtual piano on a recording, but I know I'd be biased towards recording the acoustic if I had the choice.
God Bless,
David
David B Same here.
He's a guitar player, who really doesn't like the piano, to put it mildly. He had said in past exchanges regarding using pickups to record piano, that's about the strangest thing I've ever heard!!!
David Lai a bit of an older article (27 years) but these techniques haven’t changed much.
https://www.soundonsound.com/techniques/recording-real-pianos
David Lai Hi David.. I think they are just being silly and humorous 😊
David B It wasn't that difficult. Couple mics, my laptop, an audio interface, and I uploaded it right from that sanctuary. Maybe it's not considered properly done, but I think it accurately captures what that piano sounded like in that space at that time.
Exactly my words: you went to a special venue (church), spacious probably but I can see it was not optimally placed. On the other hand you record two close‑up mics only (it seems), so that is just that. Minor phasing I could hear but that is normal with such setup. Needs E] for sure (no, it won't destroy "the real sound" of the piano because it is not "the real sound" — it is the sound of the mics, each with its own EQ freq. resp. profile). Then, of course, more mics = more difficulties
David Lai to record well requires effort and skill
Exactly my words.
David Lai sample library makers know how to do it
Not my words.
I can write down here how it should be done (if mics are to be used) but it is pointless.
No mic stands (important) and the mic cables should be wrapped with some soft material sleeves (bands) to prevent strung "string" function. That's it.
PASHKULI seems very specific. You’ve tried this recording method how many times successfully thus far? Please share some recordings.
PASHKULI then it’s not an axiomatic statement as you presented it but rather your theory.
Until proven, you need to be clear that this is what you suspect to be true.
CyberGene You don’t see Ferraris that often either but aren’t they the most desirable cars? 🙂
They are!
Gifted one, I'd sell it in a heartbeat and buy myself a succulent CFX!!
😋
🏎️ --> 🎹
HZ
HZPiano anything that even used commands a higher price than new, is, indeed, very desirable, by definition.
It is a possibility. An idea. A try if you will. Backed by irrefutable logic.
How much "better" it will be? I have no idea, so compared to what objectively? Maybe sound louder, more balanced?
Will it need post production tweaks mainly EQ? Of course it will. Microphones were used. On its own it will need some, in a mix with other instruments it will need more — that is mixing as part of audio engineering.
Everything was (is) a theory until proven right or wrong by experimentation or experienced.
Let's say that it is how I would have done it. Acoustic pianos are the biggest in size instruments (next after pipe organs).
Yes, I know that proof is in the pudding, not in the recipe.
PASHKULI irrefutable?
I think there’s a mixture here of some good recording practice and quite a lot of cargo-cult engineering.
A good room: yes.
Experiment with mic placement and actually record test passages: absolutely.
Check the complete dynamic range and listen carefully for phase/comb-filter problems when combining multiple mics: yes.
But I don’t understand why the rest follows.
A grand piano isn’t four loudspeakers called bass, mid, upper-mid and treble. The strings excite bridges and a very large soundboard, and the radiation pattern is extremely complicated and frequency dependent. One of the reasons a grand sounds like a grand piano at some distance is that all of this integrates acoustically.
So starting with four close microphones and reconstructing the piano afterwards seems rather backwards if the objective is a natural piano recording.
Likewise, why is removing the lid automatically correct? The lid is part of the acoustic design of a grand and changes its radiation into the room. You can absolutely record lid-off if that’s the sound you’re after, but it isn’t some objectively superior configuration.
The bit I disagree with most is “phase align” the six microphones.
Phase-align them to what, exactly?
You have a physically huge source, different strings in different locations, a vibrating soundboard, four close microphones, two distant microphones and hundreds of frequencies. You can time-align the arrival from one chosen location or transient. That doesn’t somehow phase-align the entire piano.
And if the distant pair exists specifically to capture the room, why would I necessarily want to time-align it to the close microphones anyway? The delayed direct sound and early reflections are part of the information that creates perceived distance and depth. Removing that delay can partially destroy the very spatial information you’re trying to capture.
Same problem with covering the frame in fluffy material and carpeting the floor. What specific audible problem has been measured or identified that we’re fixing? If there’s a bad floor reflection, fine — deal with it. But if I’ve paid for a beautiful acoustic room, I’m certainly not going to start covering reflective surfaces just because reflections exist.
“No microphone stands” being important also needs an explanation. Good stands and shock mounts are used on excellent recordings every day. Hanging microphones can be useful for sight lines, access or isolation, but there’s no obvious acoustic principle by which a microphone becomes better because its cable comes from the ceiling.
Likewise, secure your cables so they don’t transmit mechanical vibration. Fine. But dressing every cable in fluffy sleeves so it doesn’t become a resonating “string” sounds rather like a solution looking for a problem.
For a natural solo grand recording I’d start almost exactly the other way around:
Find the position where a very good stereo pair already captures the piano as a coherent instrument in the room.
Then ask what is missing.
If I need more attack, definition or control, add close mics. If I need more room, add an ambience pair.
Six microphones might eventually be the answer. But “six microphones” shouldn’t be the premise.
The fundamental difference is that I’d try to record the piano, whereas your (100% unproven) approach seems to record a collection of piano components and then try to reconstruct the piano afterwards.
