Chopin's Fantaisie-Impromptu in C# Minor, Op. 66.

[Michiel Post]

A new little comparison between the 3 PMI pianos.
Chopin Fantaisie-Impromptu (\"http://www.postmusicalinstruments.com/basishtml/fantasie.htm\")

Opinions are welcome!

[ellle]

The Steinway sound by far the best through my Sennheiser HD25\'s. (I had 3 glasses of wine too)

This is saying nothing about the samples nore about Sennheiser but all about the level of quality of such MP3\'s.

Bottom line....Sample quality has superceded MP3 quality. Time to move on to something better....

[Samarco]

I have to go with the Boesendorfer! The fullness and clarity fit the Chopin the best.

The Steinway-to thin for me.

The ambient Yamaha takes second. A lighter sound than the Big B but surprisingly sweet.

1st-Boesendorfer Wet
2nd-Bosenddorfer Dry
3rd-Yamaha ambient
4th-Steinway
5th-Yamaha close

I might have to rethink the samples I\'m using!

[Harmony 2]

images/icons/blush.gif

OK for the demos .. For a fair comparison , let me add one more demo , with the same excerpt , and my favorite Yamaha CF III .

Comments are welcome ..

[Harmony 2]

demolink :

http://harmony2.chez.tiscali.fr//demosmp3.html (\"http://harmony2.chez.tiscali.fr//demosmp3.html\")

[Michiel Post]

so...what do you prefer?

Good performance btw.

[Hardy Heern]

I liked the one with the piano ¦:^)

Frank

[eliam]

Ahh! The piano... Nothing gets close to the real thing! Thanks for sharing!

[Harmony 2]

Originally posted by Michiel Post:
so...what do you prefer?

Good performance btw. <font size=\"2\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">images/icons/smile.gif From the 3 PMI\'s ? The bosen is my pref . However , according to this context , my top preference remains the CF III demo . The reasons are :
- The performance : even whith imperfect samples , things often become magic whith a good performance .
- The liveness of the samples : a combinaison of warmth , expression , opening , this famous singing sound which gives the Soul .

We all know that the top of art in virtual orchestration is to make things sound living with small can-portions of live . That\'s an hard task for everyone .But thanks to the improving techniques , we slowly reach our ideal .
Bedankt for your valuable work , Michiel .

Here are suggestions for good classic demo material :
- Pianissimo expressivo : Schubert impromptus op 90 1 and 3 , Brahms intermezzo op 117 -2
-Presto legato : Schubert impromptu op 90-2 , Debussy \" Jardins sous la pluie\"
-FF and contrasted : Liszt hung rapsody 2 , Liszt Mephisto waltz
-Singing melody : Liszt nocturne 3 , Chopin nocturne op 9-2 , Beethoven Moonlight sonata 1 .
-AND the ultimate test :a piano concerto excerpt , Tchaikowski 1 , and a full work , Chopin fourth ballad .

What do you think ????

[Michiel Post]

Hi,
First, I think it\'s very difficult to make good demos. The way I did this (one midi file on different sampled instruments) without any tweaks is like having a deaf person playing your samples.
Performance is everything; a talented pianist listens to the sound he produces and adjusts small details in timing, attack and timbre based on that feedback. A sequencer just spits out the midi data and never shows any talent. I wanted a clean comparison so I could make tweaks or anything.

2nd: I love real grand pianos. I prefer playing them and listening to them in a typical concert hall. On the other hand I start to believe that samples can sound better in several situations. For example if you perform a grand piano on a large pop stage or in a theatre show the amplification will certainly ruin your valued acoustic grand piano sound. The feedback from tha amplification to the piano is a limitation that cannot be solved.
Also when money is a problem, you have to make a decision: do I want a cheap acoustic grand (dead) or a vivid sample?

Then recording techniques: in your mp3 the recording lacks bass but shows more life.
My MP3\'s are more static. Listening to a real piano is like listening to a full orchestra. Listening to samples is like listening to a mozaic with all very small pieces of the same orchestra.

[Harmony 2]

Hi Michiel ,

You say :
First, I think it\'s very difficult to make good demos.

/What\'s difficult ? It took me two hours to do my demo : one Gigapiano mixed thru two reverbs , a slight bass reduction , no comp , 24 bit rec in Logic , mp3 encoding in Samplitude . That\'s all ..

You say :
Performance is everything; a talented pianist listens to the sound he produces and adjusts small details in timing, attack and timbre based on that feedback. A sequencer just spits out the midi data and never shows any talent. I wanted a clean comparison so I could make tweaks or anything.

/So why don\'t try to have the best possible ?Using the same midifile for different pianos doesn\'t valorize your library . As a classical pianist , I woul\'d love to have a positive musical impression , whith the same excerpt ,and 3 different plays accorded to the sounds involved . Like in real : you don\'t play the same way on a Bosen and a Seinway .

You say :
Also when money is a problem, you have to make a decision: do I want a cheap acoustic grand (dead) or a vivid sample?

/OK for that . A very few of us can afford a concert piano + good studio . The use of samples is handy and the sound can be quite good . As example , I\'ve recorded my second piano concerto with Gigapiano , with a vivid result , even if far from the truth of a real grand piano . We can for ever criticize a sampled instr , there will always be something wrong with , but there\'s one more important thing : when Music is , it\'s over all , whatever the instrument true or virtual .


You say :
Then recording techniques: in your mp3 the recording lacks bass but shows more life.
My MP3\'s are more static. Listening to a real piano is like listening to a full orchestra. Listening to samples is like listening to a mozaic with all very small pieces of the same orchestra.


/Without any doubt . We have to deal whith this and make the miracle come . That\'s a great part or our magician work .And I do believe it\'s possible .