Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Members Recordings - Pianist Corner Brahms Intermezzo Op. 118 No 2.

Well, I think I found the links anyway. But out of deference to you, I'll keep them to myself as well, then.

Anyway, I don't have any problem with #2! Not ruined at all! I quite liked it, for what it's worth. But I think I hear what you're saying in the A minor. Not about the performance, mind you, but simply in the sound as rendered by the software.

I brought the timbre down a bit so it took the edge off the mid-treble a tad. It felt metallic and strident to me, and I hear the same thing in parts of the a minor, like in the open octaves on top. I increased the release a smidge. I also brought down the dynamic range because it seemed to help with the mid-treble sound, but not too much because then it got flat and muddy. I made sure the sustain and sympathetic resonance were on and authentic-feeling. And it goes without saying to make sure you've got the full sample library loaded and use as much memory as your computer will serve up without introducing latency issues, hopefully this means you can run it at full blast. Make sure half-pedaling is on, as well as the release samples and the soft pedal samples (assuming you're using the soft pedal anywhere, lol! I actually didn't use the soft pedal in this recording because I only had a single pedal connected at the time I recorded it. I would have used it in the piu lento section.)

I kept my hands off the DAW/Cubase effects. No reverb or anything like that. Just tried to get the most straightforward pass-through I could to keep everything isolated and identifiable so I didn't get too confused. I'm still very much a newbie at this so it helps to minimize what's going on at any one time.

The rest of my fiddling was with the velocity curves, so unless we have the same keyboard, I suspect what I did won't be of much relevance to you.

Lovely performance!

Thanks for your feedback, Louis! I definitely overdid it in the first section but this whole keyboard is new to me and I'm really wary of its ability to sound natural. Spreading out the sound a bit I guess was kind of a protective mechanism against what I was sure would be an instantly digital sound if I relied more on straight dynamics to highlight things instead. I didn't realize I did it so much until I listened to it. I prefer to be a bit more targeted about my use of such devices myself.

I am, however, tickled a bit by being called a jazz pianist. I have never, ever tried to play jazz, but now I feel like I have gained a bit of jazz street cred!

TwoSnowflakes: Mom. Wife. [Occupation]...and (inadvertent) amateur jazz pianist.

Glad you found it! It's really that A minor with the C octave. My current settings are much better and I'm happy with them (for the moment) but even still I think that octave is not the best part of the keyboard. I think I would need to try that one again but now I'm too busy to dust it off.

Assuming you heard the soundcloud version, the settings are a bit different for the A major and I'm glad it sounded ok. Maybe I will update one of my earlier threads on it so that I don't hijack this one any further.

I think you have a nice tempo, some recordings are faster but maybe this sacrifices the romantic longing of the music too much?

Every tempo has its pluses and minuses. If one is quite slow overall, very lento, then what does one do when the score reads "piu lento", and maybe the "calando" would start too slowly and would be too much? Just for me personally I think there needs to be room left over to go as slow as wanted for contrast during the interpretation.

I didn't say that you sounded like a jazz pianist. What I did say is that you sounded like an "amateur" jazz pianist, which means you sound like someone hamming it up. (which I am sure was not your intention).

From my very fist post of my video, the interpretation has been that I want every piece with a chord in it played in an arpeggiated manner. That never has been nor will it ever be the case.

So, my suggestion is that if you are going to post a recording of a piece like this then you get an acoustic grand and record it the way it should be recorded.

The reason that I don't is that it cost be almost $600 to record my video, which is no great shakes in terms of production quality. Once upon a time, Carey spilled the beans when he said his wife was on him to return the room in his house, where he was recording, to a common sense of normalcy.

Pogo, who hasn't posted in awhile, had state of the art facilities at her conservatory. If you, at this time, do not have that, then my suggestion is to wait until you do.

Anything else, in my opinion, will do you, and the music, a disservice.

That would leave a very limited number of people being able to post anything at all.

You can always NOT listen and avoid this "disservice" as you, say.

Thank you, thank you, thank you

So, now that you have weighed in, please describe in intricate detail how each and every one of your recorded posts have been produced, engineered, mixed, and then presented; that includes keyboard as well as orchestral.

Please, do so.

I know "professional" recording when I hear it, and so do a few other people who frequent this website. To continually present yourself as a "populist composer," a soul mate with the average listener, in my opinion, is just hype.

But, you go right ahead and keep doing it. I, for one, am counting on it, including the demeaning, deprecating comments.

No legitimate composer (I am not one) would ever lower themselves to this particular strata of discourse. Their philosophy is that their music speaks for itself!

You're absolutely right -- Nikolas didn't.

That's too much. A single thank you would suffice!

But I will also thank you for dignifying me with a reply. This gives me a chance to actually discuss something with you, rather than throw semi-troll stabs over.

So... I'm not sure you'll like it, but I sure hope for an honest reply from your part.

If you're talking about "posts", I'd say that my internet laptop and keyboard (QWERTY) is enough.

If you, on the other hand, are talking about audio recordings I'd say that it includes a variety of ways!

Oh, ok... If you're so kind, I will do so.

1. Using the best equipment out there, using the best concert hall out there (Greece), using the best engineers out there and using the best pianist out there.

I can't share anything right now, but, believe me, the recordings for our kickstarter project (Beauty & Hope in the 21st century) are brilliant in every aspect.

2. Using an ok piano (slightly detuned for example), in a room less than stellar and great recording equipment.

This is how we recorded "Piano Stories", which won 1st prize in the Second International Composers Competition "Artiste en Herbe" in 2013 (that's last year).

The recording is available on youtube. Check it out.

3. Using samples. Since I work in an industry (the computer games industry) that has no boundaries into what they want to hear, and I don't have the budget to use a real orchestra, or actually have one locked in my basement to use whenever, I use samples.

The results can be from "meh", to "brilliant".

For example this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x83jDko8fHc

4. Finally there's the not so great recording that's out there, because there happened to be an iphone, or an old camera, or something to capture the moment.

This includes both orchestral works, or solo piano works.

What do you mean by "professional"? I thought there's professional, and not professional.

But I don't know if you are, indeed, talking about me, but just in case you are, I happen to be a human, and also a teacher.

I despise misery in all its form (even though I go through depressive modes myself). That's enough to be aggravated with your every post.

You may think it's hype, or even worst, it may be a way to "buy some sympathy" and thus sales, but believe me after being here for such a long time, it simply isn't that.

I call it as I see it. And so do you, as far as I can tell.

But it remains. You have NO idea what I'm listening at home and what I love to listen. It's hardly all commercial recordings. It's a variety of recordings, a variety of styles and a variety of quality.

After all, youtube is already diminishing the quality of any recording, and so does soundcloud, and so does the Internet in a general sense. And so do my speakers (and probably your speakers as well).

I've got a great setup in my studio, but I don't listen to anything from the Internet in there. My music computer is not hooked on the net, to avoid any issues with virus and stuff. and even if it did, I'd require some audio files of 24-bit in 48 KHz to be able to hear "greatness".

Not sure if you even know what the above means!


And here's the best part of your post.

At first you should help us understand who, exactly, is this legitimate composer (which you are NOT) that you speak of. I'm not worried in the least that you're talking about me. I don't care.

But there's a philosophical issue, and since you ARE a philosopher, this might interest you.

WHO, indeed, is a legitimate composer today?

1. The one who composes?
2. The one who composes acceptable music that sells enough to make a living?
3. The one who composes amazing music but doesn't make a living?
4. The one who composes in paper and gets everything else done by someone else?
5. The one who composes in his/her head, and whistles the tunes to their flock of people to get to the final result?

Is the final result of a composer:
1. In paper?
2. In midi?
3. In audio?
acceptable?

You see there's all sorts of issues that require some digging into things.

As for the initial list (1-5), let me give you a few names.

1. Quite a lot of people here, including JoelW, Polyphonist, me, noobpianist, and whoever else.
2. Any rap artist who composes for Rhianna (for example). Or Lady Gaga.
3. Just check any historic list on which composer died poor and there you have it!
4. Any composer without a computer! This would include Mozart, Beethoven, Chopin, Shostakovich, etc. They did NOT create the final results that we see here today. Their manuscripts are DIFFICULT to read (I've tried with the real thing... heck that's hard), so the output that you're getting from Henle, or Schirmer, is the result of countless hours of musicologists trying to decipher what on earth each composer is saying.

You know this, if you're as great as you claim, but the power and influence of the industry is GREAT, beyond any doubt!
5. Hans Zimmer, Danny Elfman to name a couple. Amazingly rich, greatly successful composers who according to them they DON'T READ MUSIC (they do, but certainly not to the level that a normal conductor does). Their output is helped by their helpers and the result is always amazing, so there's no doubt they are brilliant.

On the latter list (1-3), we, again, have an issue.

1. Just on paper? In that case any well presented score is great. BINGO!
2. On midi? Bleh... Yet so much music is out there.
3. On audio? Where's the score? Where the ability of a performer to offer their perspective, their love for what they do into the craft of another person?

But enough of the bull.

_______________________________________



This recording, by twosnowflakes is a work in progress. It says so in the first post:

"Still not totally finished with it, but I think it's an improvement over last time. "

Are you, seriously, claiming that there's no reason for TwoSnowFlakes to keep doing that? Because they are not playing it well enough, or because the result is not a professional recording?

In both cases you're dead wrong and an awful person to say so.

Music is about sharing, about love and about helping each other. You're doing the opposite!

So, after replying in great detail your every question, let me ask you "straight in the face": Why are you here? What is it that you're offering by being here? Isn't the world bad enough without you destroying even moments of peoples joy in sharing? What about Simon (SiFi)? You are so much in need of spreading bad feelings all around that you'll go against a competition to get your need?

Ps. Thanks Mark.

TwoSnowflakes,

Thanks for posting this recording (you're a braver woman than I!). I enjoyed your rendition of the piece and I'm sure the finished version will be gorgeous. I have a somewhat different impression from some others, because it struck me as rather restrained and correct. Now, of course, I would love to be that correct myself (as in no wrong notes)! I'm still grappling with the piece in my own slow way. But I hope you won't pay too much attention to any of us kibitzers, and will let yourself go with it!

PS Personally, I love asynchronicity.

Well said Nikolas! I would hope sharing music would bring out positive energy from people but I guess it doesn't for reasons I do not understand.

To make claims about professionalism on a public forum could not be any more absurd, especially coming from someone who doesn't appear to have a concert or recording career of his own.

Keep sharing TwoSnowflakes, it will be nice to follow how this piece progresses for you.

Okaaaay. Well, I did not mean to spark such a controversy. I am disappointed to learn my recording did not meet the standards of at least one poster. I used the keyboard, as I explained in the first post, as a test for it, not so much that I think it's the best way to record piano. I would have used my own piano but, like I said, I needed a test for the keyboard. It will be used for a CD recording in the not-too-distant future for a ballet accompaniment project. The software and the sample library as well as the keyboard needed to be vetted a bit before the pianist (not me) will be sitting down in front of it.

Not only that, my own piano is out of tune--not terribly out of tune but enough that I find it moderately distracting when I record it. I'm waiting for it to be swapped out on a warranty replacement, so I'm remiss to tune it when it's going to just leave my house any day now.

So that is really why the recording is as it is. In the end I am not at the end of my piano learning journey so keep in mind that I am only capable of so much at this point, even if this were recorded on a good, well-tuned acoustic. And where I am does not merit a $600 recording session; this is a fact. If only a $600 recording session avoids disservice to the music and I'm not good enough to merit a $600 recording session, well, the take-home message is that I should not record anything at all. I guess the opinion flows out of the idea that recording as a primary matter is for end products only that legitimately aim to add to the catalog of great performances, and not for works in progress or from pianists still on their initial learning journey. I'm not sure how pervasive that opinion is among the members here, but if it's the dominant one, well, I will abide by that.

To Louis in particular: It appears I am not doing a terrific job successfully communicating with you. For example, my "flattery" at being called a jazz pianist was an attempt at humor. Believe me, I understood what you meant, and I understood it was not a compliment. I was just trying to add some levity. If that was missed, well, I apologize and now you have your explanation. However, it's not the first time we seem to be talking past one another, and while I'm not sure what it is about me that tends to bring out your more abrasive side, or agitate you, I hope I can figure out a way to interact with you that is more productive.

That's what my teacher said. She liked the recording, but then said, "now let's see you let go with it."

I thought I had!

This is absolute rubbish, isn't it?

All of us learn greatly by being able to record ourselves and we gain even more when we have the courage to share our home-made recordings with other musicians at all levels of accomplishment. We can benefit immensely from the technology at our disposal, not just from a $600.00 professional recording session but also from a $200.00 home recorder; each enables us to hear ourselves as we are unable to do when we play.

How ironic that one individual who advocates that amateurs should use only the services of a modern, professional studio should also post - as models to emulate - professional recordings made at a time when "professional" quality was substantially less than what today's $200.00 hand-held recorder can provide.

It's not all about the quality of sound, of course, but that seems to be the one criterion on which that particular narrow argument was based.

Those of us who care to listen and who care to comment when invited to do so, do so because we care about the process, we care about the result, we care about the efforts of our PW colleagues and - isn't this an interesting point? - we often sincerely enjoy what we hear.

So, TwoSnowflakes, we follow your musical journey with interest, with support, with admiration for daring to share and with appreciation for the musicianship that is growing within you.

Keep it up with whatever equipment you may have at your disposal so that we all may celebrate in your growth!

Regards,

Perhaps my long post was mostly aimed at Louis, but, YES, this is total rubbish and nobody should ever be forced to even consider this!

TwoSnowFlakes, keep doing what you do and keep sharing with us your news, your new photos, new recordings and everything else.

I, for one, am enjoying your posts!

This is strange. I don't understand how this whole argument started, especially considering that the recording is AMAZING. Keep in mind that TwoSnowflakes has only returned to piano a little over a year ago, after over a decade of not playing. Actually, this playing is amazing regardless of how long she has been playing.

Louis, I don't understand how you feel you can be an authoritative figure on setting guidelines for other to follow concerning recordings. It goes without saying that almost none of us can afford to pay 600 dollars to produce a recording which is very likely to reflect that the piece is still not at the optimum stage, just to do it again later and end up with the same result.

I'm of the opinion (as I'm sure many others are) that people should record with whatever they have. Heck, I remember asking Heather (hreichgott) a few months ago if I could participate in a recital thing here while only having my mobile to record with, and she encouraged me endlessly. Keep in mind that not everyone can afford the highest quality devices or the highest quality pianos/rooms/technicians et al.

The most important aspect of a recording is the pianist, assuming that the recording device reflects somewhat accurately the intentions of the performer. That is to say, dynamic contrast should be there, for example. But even without the best recording devices, one can learn a lot from recording oneself - as I have in the past - just by finding spots where there is uncertainty or flubs that one hasn't noticed before.

And you have to understand that there are many reason for a person to post recordings... I, for one, consider this forum a great place to share my passion for music, just like everyone else here. People post recordings to share their love for the piece, to show others the progress they've made (which TwoSnowflakes is a great example of), or to get feedback on how to further improve their playing.

It helps a lot to get a different opinion or a solution to a problem you've been having by sharing your music with others. And this place certainly would not be the same if no one was allowed to post recordings unless they have equipment of the highest tier, used to record top-notch, mistake-free, professional level recordings. Because let's face it, most of us are not professionals and never will be.

TwoSnowflakes, keep up the great work and please keep posting recordings.

Great points, and for the sake of the many people who might not be in a position to spend $200 either, or maybe don't have their $200 recorders handy but only something else at the moment......

I benefit greatly from listening to recordings of myself. I have occasionally splurged for professional recordings, for recitals and the like, and sometimes when I'm recording just for myself I bring out a somewhat high-end recorder. But most of my own recording is on a little cassette recorder -- not one of those micro-cassette things; regular cassettes, but a very small recorder, barely larger than a cassette -- which cost about $20. I use it rather than other things because overall it's much more convenient for me, including that it's much easier to quickly and precisely fast-forward or rewind to specific places. Plus, heck, I'm one of those dinosaurs who kind of prefers analog to digital anyway. I wouldn't necessarily hesitate to post one of those "takes" on this site; if I did hesitate, it wouldn't be because of the technical quality.

Of course it's not as clean or precise as digital or other high end recordings, and it's of far lesser quality than what Snowflakes posted, but I'm fully able to gain from such lower-end recordings what I'm looking to gain. Plus, very funnily in view of some of the discussion in this thread and who it's coming from, as per what Bruce noted it is of higher technical quality than very old professional recordings that are sometimes posted here as models.

BTW, I love those very old recordings too -- and not just because I love those old styles of playing, but also because I don't find the lesser technical quality to be a barrier.

I don't think I ever answered this directly! It's a Kawai VPC1, with Synthogy Ivory II.

Thanks!