Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner What a difference a good piano makes!

Today I had the first opportunity in my life to record some stuff in a teacher's apartment where he has an artist's piano and great recording equipment. I feel like it's a such load off of my shoulders - I absolutely do not feel bad anymore at all about how I sound on inferior pianos. I came in with very little practice, 6 pieces that are unpolished, and played average at best for me from memory with only 1-3 takes each. And with no effort I sound amazing - or at least, vastly better than I've ever heard myself. I know that with focus and polish, and some more experience on that piano, and a bit more technique to handle tricky areas, my tone will be amazing! Phew.

In addition, he also had a golden ribbon microphone and I actually heard what my voice sounds like also. Up until now I assumed it was much worse than what I was hearing myself - now I know that it's actually more or less what I hear myself singing.

Of course, I know you can learn to coax a decent sound out of even the worst pianos, and I'm not saying I absolve myself of such a responsibility. But it's such a night and day difference it's both alleviating and frustrating. Frustrating, because now I'm a bit irked that I can't practice all the time with such a setup so I can learn to exploit it to the maximum

Anyone else have this eureka moment before?

I play a 1977 Yamaha. I suspect it hasn't been regulated for 5-10 years, and I can definitely feel it when I'm trying to play quietly/evenly. It's also not as responsive when playing fast passages. When I go to my local piano shop and play the perfectly regulated/voiced Steinways, they play themselves. It's like my technique doubles. Quick passages and soft playing feel effortless. It really makes a world of difference.

I'm thinking you haven't played on some of the worst pianos!

I once played on a Fazioli grand, the largest one with four pedals, that was used for piano recitals by famous pianists. This piano had extensive use that the hammers sounded metallic, tinny. The humidity in the room caused the action to swell so that repetition was sluggish and uneven. Now, for a $200,000 piano, it sounded and played terribly. On the contrary, the Kawai RX-2 day sounded great and repetition was faster and was 10x less expensive.

Maintaining a piano in excellent condition takes a lot of money. Hammers wear down and become bright, humidity increases friction and slows the action, felt bushings become compressed and increases key travel, etc. And it's all a slow process that it isn't consciously registered in the mind. And some pianos are terrible for maintenance because the hammers are of such low quality that it can't be voiced properly, pin blocks so loose that it can't maintain a tuning for more than 15 minutes, etc.

But yes, the best maintained piano usually has the best touch and sound.

I learned that pianos that are tuned perfectly stay in tune for literally like 20-30 minutes, and in professional recording studios they are re-tuned for every session. The piano there was like 99% in tune. My teacher told me that when it's perfectly in tune it sounds even more noticeably amazing.

An artist's piano? What make and model is it?

Regards,

Yamaha C7 of some kind. It has a little golden plate inscription on the inside, which my teacher told me means it was specially crafted as an artist's piano.

I know this feeling very well. I spent the better part of 6 years on a 9' Steinway grand, and made leaps and bounds during that time. For the last 8 years, I've had a keyboard, and I can count on one hand the number of real pianos I've had the opportunity to touch in those 8 years. It can be very frustrating. My best advice: never go more than 80% when practicing on inferior equipment. You'll sacrifice technique to try and get that extra 20%, and it isn't worth it. (This is from trial and experience..)

By the way, in case y'all are interested, here is the track with my recordings. All 5 pieces are on one track.

The pieces are:

Prelude in C Major (Shostakovich)
Prelude and Fugue in G Major (Bach, WTC 2)
Prelude in E Major (Bach, WTC 2)
Prelude in A Major (Shostakovich)
Prelude Op. 10 No. 4 (Scriabin)

Track here:
https://soundcloud.com/cowoncrack-1/byron-challoner

There are a smattering little flubs here and there, especially in the E Major prelude which I've made monstrously tricky for myself with insane finger substitutions and legato fingerings, and rarely goes well in one take. There are also very noticeable musical imperfections here and there, especially my novice pedaling (I've started with Bach Bach Bach for my first 1-2 years) but I feel like if anything this piano helps you see these flaws more clearly and thus teaches you what you need to polish. And the overall sound is quite pleasing and expressive.

Enjoy!

haha i literally made a thread about this and yes it is so true about the eurek moment. unfortunately i seem to take this in a negative way as i know what i want my sound to be like, but cannot achieve to an inferior piano. but better some piano than none.

i think i'm going to have to take the advice about not going for the extra 20%
Although it is so frustrating!! i think the worst fate is to be robbed of our truest potential

brb saving for a steinway

edit: just listened to some of your bach. first off, bravo is sounded very nice. i could tell in your playing that you knew exactly how to make the good use of dynamics, and if you were to be able to practice on that you would no doubt make it sing brilliantly

I've been thinking about this a lot recently...because this is how I feel... I come home from my lessons, spend the whole week trying to get out from my piano what happened on my teacher's grand...and cannot quite reach it... Then I go to the lesson and realize I am doing things that I shouldn't...

Maybe I should just accept the sound as it is now and wait until I get a nice grand of my own.

I struggled with this for years, myself. In my coping process, I've drawn parallels from other things I've done and/or do, but the basic premise is that you can only do the best you can do with the tools you have to work with.

It would be like hitting a Titleist ProV-1 300 yards, and then wondering why you can't do that with a wiffle ball. It's not you, it's the ball. The wiffle ball wasn't built to do what a ProV-1 does. Same for the piano.

I really have no idea what you are talking about

It would be like hitting a golf ball 300 yards, and then wondering why you can't do that with a wiffle ball. It's not you, it's the ball. The wiffle ball wasn't built to do what a golf ball does. Same for the piano.

>Anyone else have this eureka moment before?

LOL yes that's why I have a good grand at home. After all I hear myself playing everyday and it better sounds good anyway

Thanks for the translation (got it after google told me what a whiffle ball is).

BTW: I just wonder why golf is so often brought up when discussing playing the piano. After all what counts in golf is what happens at the END of one's act (where the ball ends) and in that sense the piano is sligthly different. And quite complex. There are so many variables in a performance, that trying to reduce them for meaningful analysis is difficult. It isn't easy for golf either, but it makes more sense to use physics to explain the ball's trajectory...

It's only brought up by those who play golf since they seem to think the analogy apt. The motion of the body is very important to hit that ball correctly. If you mess up the technique, you mess up where the ball lands (ignoring wind and other environmental influences.) That's why the analogy is used, even though most people can't relate to golf. I certainly can't watch it but I'm sure playing is much more interesting.

In my case that applies to every sport...

I've been thinking about a golf analogy: Ben Hogan said he loved huge galleries behind the green; he could fire at the pin with impunity and the gallery would stop any overshoot! My 5th fingers are so tiny I could use them to pick old-fashioned locks, so I double 4th and 5th fingers whenever I can, especially on black keys. No point missing when you can have a back-up!

Another weird idea on "good" pianos: Michaelangeli's personal piano was supposedly an old Petrof. Could wrestling with a bear of a practice piano have contributed to his preternatural accuracy in performance?

Roland: very nice playing...wonderful recording!

Thanks for clearing up the golf analogy. I use it a lot because I find many of the concepts to be similar and easily describable. Obviously, I should have just used "golf ball" here instead of choosing a specific brand. lol my bad.

One of the reasons I like to use the golf analogy is for exactly what you brought up here -- the end result of the golf swing is to get the ball to land in a certain spot (often while flying a particular trajectory). But how you get there happens way before you ever strike the ball. Same with the piano. The end result is to hear a particular sound, but how you get there happens before you strike the key.

There are some of us who know very little about golf. For instance, the only thing I know about it is that Lee Trevino has been hit by lightning twice while playing golf. His advice now is to grab a one iron and head for the clubhouse at the first sign of a storm -- because "Even God can't hit a one iron." ;-)