Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Professional Recording

"For Youngarts, I just played through over and over until I got a clean recording..."

Our son was interested in the YoungArts application this year (junior) but we knew little about recording expectations and when he was invited, there was little time left and he was in the middle of working on new pieces. This has happened for concerto competition deadlines. If I had to start over, I would have pushed for recording at least a few pieces each year to have on hand. We have mostly live recordings. Some of them are very good, but perhaps not for submission purposes.

BTW, did you go to a YoungArts Week, and if so, was it worth it?

You can watch a performance of YoungArts participants here (starting at just before the 35 minute mark) to get a feel for the quality of music making there. Technically, the level appears extremely high, particularly if they only had that week to work on this chamber music (seems unlikely but it is possible). I know one of the faculty, and she is excellent.

Yes, record in one take with NO edits.



The level is, at least, with NO wrong or missing notes, proper tempo, dynamics and interpretation.



Yes. And please make sure that the piano is tuned and voiced very well.
If possible record on a concert size instrument. (Steinway D
Yamaha CF III, Kawai EX, or similar)

I'll agree with the overthinking in the sense that the better you are, the less important the recording is. The goal would be to play well enough to make the recording mean less.

"AKG-414 XLIIs" If I need video, can they be used with my Q3HD?

"...a number of places I have applied to expressly forbid it, and you would do well to treat them all that way."

I assume that there are technical ways to detect edits, but in the end, you will have to pass through a live audition.

I can be sure that many would argue that this is a grey area, but I would counter your observation by saying that "the best that the musician can do" surely doesn't involve "... in multiple takes." I would assume that the best a musician can do implies a single, played-through, unedited recording as in a live performance.

Regards,

They were finalists, so how and when did they get put together?

Thanks for the link. My son will like it. He has been playing in chamber groups for about 5 years.

Yes, but if it is a Q3HD. Because it has a line in port. To which you can connect a mixer's or preamps's line out.(you must connect the AKG's to a mixer or preamp with phantom power capability)
Then, it will record the audio from the line in (in sync with the video) and cancel the onboard mics.

OTOH, if you have a Q3, to my knowledge the Q3 does not have the line in port and the MIC IN is not the same thing. You can't connect a line level signal to a mic port.

"one take?"

Does anyone record with one take and send it in? I can see the requirement for no edits, but one take?

"And please make sure that the piano is tuned and voiced very well. If possible record on a concert size instrument. (Steinway D Yamaha CF III, Kawai EX, or similar)"

"tuned and voiced?"

And if you don't or can't, what will their reaction be?

One take means, a piece recorded from start to finish as a whole without ANY breaks. Just as it would be in a live audition. Of course you can record several "one takes" and choose one of them.





Here is OUR reaction to a PW member's recording.

http://www.pianoworld.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/2015336

You guess the judges reaction. Usually they will quit listening after 30 seconds.

+1, although would you agree that selecting the best of a few takes would be acceptable? Particularly for young pianists, as they often don't have a full recital program to record, and the first selection might have a 'still warming-up' quality to it. Multiple takes would make sure that one is settled into the process, just like a few minutes into a recital.



+100, although a couple of split notes won't put you out of the running by any means. Make it perfect in practice of course, but we come back to the idea of treating recording sessions like live performances with a retry button. Sweep and flow with some splits over cautious and no wrong notes. It amazing how the 'permission to fail' of a recording session (as opposed to the single shot of a performance) can give a recording the color and inspiration (for lack of a better word) of a live performance with a physical freedom that really makes wrong notes less likely (if you're not worrying about getting it perfect the very first time with no second try - like in performance - you body relaxes and allows the work do be done unimpeded). Definitely make sure that the recording has warmth:

• experiment with different mike distances
• big, tuned, voiced, generally evened out piano
• acoustic slightly more resonant than would be desirable for solo performance - this is why home recordings often have an 'acoustic coffin' feel.

Churches, conveniently, often provide a good solution to the latter two.



My overthinking comment was not as thoughtful as it could be, and I think you are spot on.

They cannot be plugged into the Q3HD (XLR cables), but if you bought a Zoom H4N (the least expensive usable recording device with XLR inputs) for $300 (kind of a pittance compared to the mikes themselves), you could use both Zoom devices simultaneously and sync them up in an editing program without too much fuss.

It's the principle of the thing, in my opinion. Selecting from different takes isn't falsifying your ability to perform something; it's like presenting your face with makeup, but not with surgical alteration (not the best analogy, but I think it works).



That would be great, but good preamps aren't cheap. The syncing may or may not be easier and cheaper, depending on your editing skills and software.



See my comments on takes earlier in this post. Just my opinion, but I believe it is a widely held standard that multiple takes are fine in 90% of cases. There are a few exceptions (certain competitions are more stringent), but festivals and colleges are generally less strict in this regard.

I would do the utmost to make sure that the piano is very well regulated. That matters more than the recording setup. If we take my makeup analogy, if the tuning is at all off or the voicing is subpar, it's like heading to a job interview without showering after a late night out on the town. Definitely a faux pas.



+1 on the "one take" opinion. I beg to differ with regard to the Mozart recording: there is a good deal of work for the pianist to do (despite great musical ideas), but I found the piano and recording to be near the bottom of the level I expect good recordings to be, but certainly within the limits of a "good" recording setup.

Just my $0.02, or rather $200, as I appear to have written quite a lot!

Are you saying that they would stop listening after 30 seconds because of this piano's voicing? I would say that there are more obvious reasons. It also depends on what this video was submitted for.

There are also other types of mistakes, like those normal (?) slips during a live performance or competition. Those are unlike what you see in your video link. From what I can tell, the general expectation is that you have to do enough "one takes" to find one recording without those performance-type mistakes. I think that's what my son needs to learn how to do. He is used to one-shot performances. In some ways, recordings force you to focus on a higher level of consistency and perfection. Then again, recording might get you to become more conservative and safe.

You must make sure that the piano is well tuned and voiced, so that it won't hinder your son's performance, AND distract the judges' attention from the music. This is a prerequisite for a "professional recording". Usually a tuner is hired during a professional recording session to keep the piano in tune (if necessary) during the whole session.

I apologize for setting this thread up to go in multiple directions. Blame it on my need to figure out what the important issues are with my son and recording. The pieces he is currently playing (that I listed in the original post) should indicate his general level, and he is not playing over his head. But there is his teacher's philosophy of always moving on to new pieces. For example, he is in the process of making a pass through all of Chopin's etudes rather than picking one or two to really master. They are doing the same thing with many Bach Prelude & Fugues. It seems that you can get away with this for performances, but not for recording. I'm trying to get him to settle on a repertoire for college auditions next year, but it keeps changing. New pieces are more interesting.


"It amazing how the 'permission to fail' of a recording session (as opposed to the single shot of a performance) can give a recording the color and inspiration (for lack of a better word) of a live performance with a physical freedom that really makes wrong notes less likely (if you're not worrying about getting it perfect the very first time with no second try - like in performance - you body relaxes and allows the work do be done unimpeded)."

My son has no nerves problems with performances or competitions. Mistakes (not fundamental issues of technique, tempo, or interpretation) don't bother him. The problem is that maybe these mistakes should bother him some more. It seems as though recording sessions could get him to focus more on perfection and consistency. Even when we do record, it's all about freedom and not worrying about what might be minor issues for live performances. Looking at the recordings we just created, there are long stretches where he is gazing off at the ceiling. His teacher tells him to focus on musicality and interpretation and to not worry about slips of the fingers. This gives him a good philosophy for performances, but it doesn't seem to be the right idea for recording.

It seems like you have to be a perfectionist for practice (or recording), but somehow lose that for performance. (I've seen some kids look miserable after performances I thought were pretty good.) My son has a good performance attitude, but can't seem to switch over to perfectionist for recording.

Tuned piano, definitely. Regulated and voiced will probably help playing, both technically and interpretively. Concert grand, well, I would not recommend any school where that would make a difference. I am sure that every music school has admitted piano students who have hardly ever played on a grand piano, let alone a concert grand.

Let me remind you that in "professional" environment a no mistake performance is the norm. It has nothing to do with being a perfectionist. It is just normal and expected. Nothing special.
So, there is no such thing as "switching over to perfectionist mode" for recording.

Hi, smh. There have been some good points of view expressed; I'd like to add my thoughts. Firstly, so you know where I'm coming from, I'm an amateur pianist, but I do take professional lessons and advice: last year I made what I hope to all intents and purposes is a professional CD, using a professional engineer, equipment, a good piano and hall. So I have some experience of what the process involves.

Re audio editing versus an "honest" one-take recording: that is, I think, up to your moral stance. I would bet that some of the other submissions will be tweaked just that little bit.

You can get a perfectly serviceable sound comparatively cheaply: I've used a Rode NT5 pair and an Edirol R-09HR. In total that shouldn't cost more than £500. If you want to go for the fully professional recording, then the sound engineer should be able to bring his own equipment; however make sure they are mics suitable for piano recording. During my recording session (2 days for 65 mins final result, approx 7 hrs of takes) I played a Steinway Model D and the mics were Rode NT5 pair (close), Rode NT4 stereo and U87 pair.

A church is a good place to record, as previously suggested; of course try to find one with a decent piano. And do have it tuned and regulated properly in advance. The hire for a church will usually be a lot cheaper than a dedicated concert hall.

If you go the fully professional route, you're of course going to have to pay the engineer for his recording time, and for studio editing time, should you feel inclined.

Nikolas's comment: "..the pianist needs to deal with his/her performance while recording and NOTHING else. A person cannot deal with multiple issues (what the cameras are getting, the audio, the mics, etc). Other people need to take care of that..." Take that on board: that is very good advice indeed.

Spend a reasonable amount of time on setup, making sure the piano sounds decent. Don't put mics too close to the piano, as I did. You're likely to find pedal noise, even extraneous string noises, being generated. My recording(s) would have been blighted by them but for my engineer's skill with noise reduction techniques - and heaven alone knows how much time was spent cleaning everything up. (In passing Hakki, your recording is really rather nice, but there's certainly some pedal (or whatever) noise apparent).

People who are talking about "perfect" recordings: they don't exist. If you listen, and I mean really listen, closely to even the greatest pianists, you will hear the odd hints that it is a fallible human playing. That's even before you start to debate interpretation. However, that's not an excuse to avoid aspiring to a polished rendition.

A word of clarification : I should have written "multiple edits" not "multiple takes" in the above statement.

It shouldn't matter how many times you record the work(s) in question in trying to get a "good copy", but the final version for submission to an admissions jury I think should be one that is played through in one (final) take, with no editing from start to finish if you really are setting out to show "what the musician can do."

Regards,

It's cheating, but how will they know? I mean 99% of studio records go into editing mode immediately after the first day and I'm not ashamed to say that 3 out of 7 works in the duets I recently released had a couple of minor edits in...

And of course a recording is either way too bad a way to judge: Can you imagine someone working for 2 years on a work, and recording it continuously for a week to get things perfect? That would certainly be cheating as well I think...

Aren't we writing about two different issues here? One is a recording for (possibly) commercial distribution where one has edited out mistakes for the ultimate and continued enjoyment of the listeners. That seems to be the norm - should be the norm - for commercially distributed recordings.

The other is a recording for submission to a jury which needs to decide if a potential student plays well enough to be admitted to a program of study. Most of us amateurs don't have the skills or the equipment to edit so well that edits wouldn't be apparent. As a judge, I don't think I'd want to pass judgment on a pianist whose submission was obviously full of edits. How would I know what the edits covered up and how, as a result, would I be able to judge the real potential of the candidate?

As for the more skilled editors asking "How would the jury know?" (if slick edits were so well done they were not revealed) that is a question of the integrity of the candidate, I would think. That decision rests on his shoulders, doesn't it?

Regards,

How is "recording it continuously for a week" any different from adding extra practice until the result is satisfactory?

Indeed we are talking about two different things...

But I should note that despite my knowledge around music, etc, I've only heard 1 single edit in all the CDs I have. It's in the skythian suite by Prokofiev, in a Deutsche Gramophone recording... Nothing else, ever...

So while I consider myself skilled I have no idea how many edits take place in a recording... Others recordings at least!

But the point remains: someone here is asking about advice. I know that it wouldn't be ethical, but if he handed me a few thousand dollars, I'd help him edit to 'perfection' the recordings (<-ok... not really... but anyhow). and the point is still there: A recording is a bad way to cut someone from auditioning... I think... (remember that I have some grudges against recordings and I deal with those in my PhD: A recording is a fake artefact (stream of numbers actually, since we're talking about digital recordings here) of something that happened in a given time. It's a photo of a specific point in time.

_____________________

Personally I'd accept a final exam with a final work, unknown to the pianists, that they have to learn in a certain period of time. I think that queen elisabeth competition does that with their performers: One year is for composers to work on a concerto (violin or piano) and the next year it's the performers time, who play that concerto (unknown to them).

Talk about fairness I think...