From: paul wiener <pwiener@ms.cc.sunysb.edu>
To: Bill Larson <william.larson@yahoo.com>, f_minor@email.rutgers.edu
Subject: RE: [F_minor] Re: Zenph 55 G'bergs released! (Brad Lehman)
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 09:37:58 -0400
That may all be true, but if it is, how can any recording be better than a
live performance (allowing for physiological differences in hearing
capabilities), and if performances are the ultimate reality, why did Gould
give them up for recording? Obviously he also believed that recordings were
superior musically - if not technically - to performances. That doesn't
mean we have to believe him. After all, he was speaking only for his own
ears.
At 07:21 PM 3/9/2007, Bill Larson wrote:
paul wiener <pwiener@ms.cc.sunysb.edu> wrote: I think you're
overestimating how exact the technical specs have to
be to reproduce sound. Remember, Gould was in love with technology
and depended on it, even expected it to save music from live
performers. How come he wasn't worried about these issues? I'm sure
even Gould himself couldn't have reproduced exactly the performance
he had recorded.
There are so many factors which affect tone, and which are limited by
the reproducing eqiupment. As a pianist, my reservations would be that
the technology may not be able to successfully resolve the following (for
example):
--pedal shadings vs. overlapped notes (and the differences in instrumental
resonance that ensue)-- this would be my main reservation, and I'm afraid
that tape hiss, room noise, and noise from the performer himself may
obscure some delicate shading to the equipment doing the analysis, and
confuse it into making a slightly wrong judgement;
--subtleties in hammer velocity derived from arm weight usage, which can
create a more room-filling sound rather than simply a louder sound;
--melodic voicing, which may be determined by perhaps a weak or an
overly-bright characteristic to the piano being recorded upon, or even
determined by individual notes on said piano which were not up to spec--
in other words, poorly voiced hammers may cause a pianist to play a melody
line slightly louder than usual, to make the sound penetrate more; the
analysis equipment would only perceive the volume of the initial hammer
attack, not recognizing the performer's deliberate overcompensation; the
pianist may not play the melody as loud on a better-voiced instrument, but
we get to hear an artificially-and-erroneouly-emphasized melody line on a
reproduction instrument with perhaps better voicing;
--playing in a manner which complements the recording space, but doesn't
work as well with the reproducing space;
--specific to the 1955 Goldbergs: the fact that the recording qulity was
light in the bass region, and the reproducing software would have to have
a reverse bass-emphasis curve to complement the roll-off on the original
tape machines.
--for recordings using improperly-calibrated noise reduction: a
faster-than-intended decay of the notes may trick the reproducing software
into thinking that the key was released slightly to squelch the sound, or
that the note was released earlier than it was;
--the general hammer force being the same as the original recording. For
example, if Gould plays in a piano-to forte dynamic range, and the
reproducing piano plays the same material in a mezzo-forte to fortissimo
range, there will be some brightness and force to the rendition which were
not present in the original;
--how can the piano tell exactly when the soft pedal is being applied? My
feedback from a given instrument may cause me to sometimes depress it the
whoule way, or just partway. There's even so much more garadation to the
use of the sustain pedal, which as I said before, can be mistaken for
finger-overlapping of tones.
--bad original edits, which can cause errors is volume, sudden shifts in
voicing, etc.
None of this may matter (or be detectable) to 99% of listeners, but it
matters to me, and to many of you. We can say, "oh, that sounds so much
like the original", but if we hear the original first, lack of subtlety
can be apparent. Unfortunately, some people will hear only the
reproductions, and never know exactly what the pianist was really capable
of.
I could go on and on about this, and in fact I want to; I'm being expected
uptown in ten minutes to have a beer, so goodbye for now.
_______________________________________________
F_minor mailing list
F_minor@email.rutgers.edu
https://email.rutgers.edu/mailman/listinfo/f_minor
_______________________________________________
F_minor mailing list
F_minor@email.rutgers.edu
https://email.rutgers.edu/mailman/listinfo/f_minor