piano samples vs. real piano

[jmitch]

What's your guys opinion on piano samples versus recording a real piano? I have the option to record a Steinway Grand in a relatively nice room. Which would you choose? The piano samples are so good, it's hard to tell. What's your opinion?

[fantasticsound]

Personally, I can live with a good piano sample on most things, but I'm not a pianist, per se. More of a hack - chord comp'ing wannabe.

 

But if I had access to a Steinway in an acoustically pleasant environment and good mics, desk, etc... Damn right I'm going to mic the piano!

[jmitch]

Yeah, that's kind of what I figured. It's a brand new Steinway Grand, it sounds really nice. The mics I would be using are two Audio Technicas (small capsule). The mics, actually, are very good, very transparent and neutral responding. I'm hoping for some good results.

[Duddits]

I think it depends on what you're doing. If you're recording solo piano, piano and voice, or piano and a few other things, that no question, use the real piano. However, if you're talking about a 67 track recording and the piano is only playing a few notes on the fourth beat of the second measure of every chorus, then a decent piano sample might be a better choice.

[philbo_Tangent]

In a word, dynamics. A real piano has them. A sampler (at least the ones I've heard) do not.

 

In a piano, this isn't just loudness - when you hit a piano hard, the harmonic content & rates of harmonic decay & a lot of other elements of timbre change drastically.

[jmitch]

It's not exactly a solo piano, but it has a main part in the piece. I guess the question is how much of a better sound can I get from the real piano. Samples sound pretty damn good.

[Michelle ggurl]

Just went thru this on a project I'm recording now. Three songs really needed real piano ... I wanted to be able to half-pedal and have accurate sustain on them, as well as the overtones. I know of no sample (or a sample's interaction with a controller!) that replicates that properly. This kinda sounds Yogi Berra-ish, but the more solo the piano, the more you need a real piano. Makes sense if you think about it though.

[doug osborne]

Lots of people come from all over to record on the Yamaha grands in our studios (the rooms, mics, preamps, staff, etc., are all part of the draw).

 

The consensus is that, as has been said above, for some parts you wouldn't hear the difference in the final mix. But, a competent (or great) pianist would be inspired by a real piano for a better performance, which is more important than sound quality, dynamics, control, etc.

[Duddits]

It's not just the sound of the samples. It's also the nature of the part, the material itself.

 

If it's "real piano music," it can only be played on a real piano, not a synthesizer. It's just two different animals from the point of view of the player (assuming the player is a piano player, not a more generic keyboard player).

 

If it's clumps of notes functioning as some sort of pad, hit, riff, or color, then samples can work just fine.

 

The reason why I mentioned simultaneous parts is because I find that there's a general rule of thumb that the more parts, the harder it is to distinguish real from virtual instruments. Furthermore, real instruments have a richness and complexity that virtual instruments don't have, and there's sometimes that you might actually prefer a virtual instrument over a real one for that reason. It's similar to choosing a thinner solid state mic pre over a richer tube mic pre if a part is 1 of 40 rather than 1 of 2.

 

A friend of mine told me that he still uses his yamaha SPX 90 reverb unit in large multitrack mixes because while it's sound is thin by today's standards, it doesn't accumulate into mush over many tracks, as some more contemporary, sophisticated and complex reverbs do.

 

Similarly, a thinner piano sample in a multitrack mix of popular (rather than classical or jazz) music might be a better choice than a real, live, 9 foot Bosendolfer.

 

However, if it's just a few tracks, and a real pianist with practiced fingers playing a real piano part, then there's no substitute for real hammers hitting real strings.

[Tedly Nightshade]

It's quite a challenge to mic a real piano.

 

That said, no sample can come anywhere even remotely close to comparing with an even decently recorded real piano. For a well-recorded real piano, especially a Steinway Grand, there's no question at all that the Steinway will be far, far superior for any application at all.

 

If the part is at all percussive, add 600% to the strong language above. No piano sample is remotely percussive.

[jmitch]

You guys talk as if the samples today are as bad as General Midi. They are really quite astounding, because they are taken from real pianos. So when you hit that note hard, your getting the natural harmonic content of a real piano. Your getting those overtones that come from a real piano. These aren't synthesized sounds, these are real piano sounds. Yes, of course if it's just rock chords being slammed down you won't hear much of a difference.

 

But good samples are hard to distinguish. The samples are real hammers hitting real strings.

[ricknbokkerv2.0]

I'd have to say go with the real thing in this situation. All good points being offered here.

 

I used to slap a couple of PZM mics on the underside of the lid. Had to goose up the one on the high side, but it sounded splendid.

 

Ricky

[jmitch]

<>

 

It is quite percussive. But, still, have you guys heard the latest piano samples out there lately? From the way you talk about them, I would guess not.

[Tedly Nightshade]

Originally posted by jmitch:

<>

 

It is quite percussive. But, still, have you guys heard the latest piano samples out there lately? From the way you talk about them, I would guess not.

I've heard a hell of a lot of piano samples, maybe not the very latest- forget it. Without the strings resonating TOGETHER on a nice soundboard, no dice, at all. There is no simulation for that. Even to sample, which is lacking something really substantial even for single notes, you would have to sample every actual chord at every actual volume to get a halfway decent hint of what real soundboards really do.

 

Believe me, I wish very fervently that samples could begin to approach the real deal- I have a great piano player here that would adore to be able to pull out her piano bag on stage, but no luck at all in any way. We're always ear to the ground for something that can do a decent job of it, and nothing is even remotely close. Next on the list is a trip to try out the GEM thing, forget the name just now, that is not a sampler at all- maybe it will be passable? Maybe? It's worth a trip, I think, to see.

 

But if you'd be perfectly happy with the samples, hell, use the samples! I can't imagine feeling that way myself. Especially for anything percussive at all...

[The Soundsmith]

Duddits makes good points - the more complex the rest of the composition, hthe more likely samples ill go unnoticed. Other points to consider:

 

How good are your recording skills? I have a Yamaha 6' grand I bought for recording - very bright and present. With Neumann SD capsules, I can get a decent sound, although the instrument is in the living room, not the (garage, but well-treated) studio. Therefore, I generally use my Gigastudio Bardstown Bosendorfer for most things.

 

Performance ability - it's REALLY nice to be able to go back and correct clams or dynamics, etc. in a midi sequence. But it may not FEEL as good playing a controller: this impacts the piece as well.

 

Musical style - I have six different acoustic piano sample libraries. I have found for certain songs, a different instrument can change the character of the piece - try that on your Steinway (though changing mikes and placement can make a similar difference.)

 

In the end, ya pays yer money and ya makes yer choice. The one to use is the one that you can coax the best performance out of.

 

Dasher

[fantasticsound]

Originally posted by jmitch:

You guys talk as if the samples today are as bad as General Midi. They are really quite astounding, because they are taken from real pianos. So when you hit that note hard, your getting the natural harmonic content of a real piano. Your getting those overtones that come from a real piano. These aren't synthesized sounds, these are real piano sounds. Yes, of course if it's just rock chords being slammed down you won't hear much of a difference.

 

But good samples are hard to distinguish. The samples are real hammers hitting real strings.

You miss a very important point. Comparing samples to a real piano is like comparing engine parts outside the workings of the engine. The point of a certain design spec is for it to work in conjunction with other parts.

 

The parts of a piano, as Ted Nightshade ably mentioned, combine their resonances on a single soundboard. The cumulative sound of several notes on a keyboard sample is more analagous to Brian May's guitar parts on Queen songs where each voice of chords is recorded separately. The voices do not sound the same when played individually through a distortion as when they're combined prior to the distortion. A sampled piano is a combination of individual sounds, not the result of combined resonances on the soundboard.

 

But more importantly,

 

Originally posted by Doug Osborne:

...But, a competent (or great) pianist would be inspired by a real piano for a better performance, which is more important than sound quality, dynamics, control, etc.

Even a hack like me appreciates the feel of a real piano over that of the best controllers around.

[techristian]

If I had the greatest sounding acoustic piano here for 1 WHOLE WEEK, I MIGHT be able to make a convincing PIANO SAMPLE BANK. I expect it would take the whole week or even longer because.....

 

1) I wouldn't just sample a few keys and change the sample frequency to give each key an octave or 1/2 octave.

 

2) I would first need to get the best FLAT response microphones that I could afford.

 

3) I would need a moderately dead soundproof room.

 

4) Every sample would be a 3 track sample, with one microphone closest to the striking hammer and another inside to the RIGHT side of nearest the primary resonator such as the box. The other mic will be on the inside of the LEFT side of the box. 3 tracks are used so that they can be mixed to stereo later on. Later on I may decide that the higher keys need more hammer and less resonance or visa versa and I would be able to mix accordingly.

 

FOR X=1 TO 72

5) Record this note striking the key soft. Record this striking the key HARD. Record this striking the key soft with the pedal sustain fully down. Record this striking the key HARD with the pedal sustain fully down.

 

6) All of that was just to record the sound of ONE KEY of the piano. Now leave the right and left microphones in the same place, but move the hammer mic THE SAME DISTANCE from the next hammer as you did for the first hammer. GO BACK TO NUMBER 5 71 TIMES. (DO THIS SAME THING 72 TIMES.

NEXT X

 

Get the idea? I may not have the mic placement right but I'm a drummer so you'll have to forgive me. I have tried similar PROJECTS in the past. Believe me. It is easier to buy somthing like Unity-DS1 by Bitheadz then to try this.

 

Dan

 

http://musicinit.com/pvideos.html

[sign]

Try the following: put your foot on the sustain pedal of a grand piano and press it down.

 

Tap with a piece of wood on the grand's frame and listen carefully, the ringing of 200+ strings. Nice sound isn't it?

 

Try the same with a digital piano, press the pedal and tap somewhere.

 

Play a chord on the grand and press the sustain pedal, most of the strings will add something special to the overall sound, a sampled piano will not do this.

 

And this is only just one of the differences.

[Ouizel]

Wouldn't that be:

For X= 1 to 88

 

??

[jmitch]

True, there are difference. I wasn't denying that. I'm simply saying the piano samples today are pretty damn good, and hard to compare in the context of a recording. Even solo, they are comparable. Just listen to any demo. Again, I'm not saying the real piano is the same. But, for a piano, they have come close. In my opinion. When you think about it, a piano is a relatively simple instrument to model. There's no tonal variation within a single piano, and there's no pitch changing. It's simply a straight key making a sound at a certain pitch. I believe in certain Roland models, they actually have implemented adjacent string vibrations set off from by other strings being hit. Yes, you don't have the resonation of all the wood, but please, just listen to some demos of some top samplers. You'll see what I mean.

 

Lets, put it this way. They've come a lot closer to emulating a real acoustic piano digitally than any other instrument. All string instruments are almost impossible to emulate digitally, because of one characteristic and that is direct contact with the strings. There is so much more ability to control every aspect of the instruments sound when you are in direct contact with the strings. That is why, it is in my opinion, that a piano is the closest we have come, and will always be the closest we will come to digitally emulating the acoustic counterpart.

[miroslav]

If it's a "piano" song...and you can easily record a real piano...go for it.

 

Otherwise...sampled will work fine for a LOT of cases.

 

One thing to remember when you argue "sampled piano" vs. "recording a real piano"...

...a sampled pianoISa recording of a real piano!

 

And if the sample is from a good library...then who ever recorded it probably had access to some top-of-the-line shit...and really knew what they were doing.

If you can improve on that...with a couple of your decent mics and hopefully, a well-tuned, decent sounding piano...then record away!

 

I will agree...from the pianists point of view...it's a lot more fun, and more inspiring playing a real acoustic piano instead of a MIDI controller...the action is like night and day...plus, when you are sitting at the piano...that sound is coming right at you, and it drives your playing.

 

Oh...one more thing...

 

With a real acoustic piano...well...you got the sound of THAT piano...and that is it.

 

With a sample library...you can have a few dozen pianos with the turn of a knob!

 

It's interesting how a particular piano sample worked great on the last tune...but not on this one...and then you dail in a different piano sample that works great on the new tune!

You can't pull that off very easily if you only have one piano...in one room...

...OK you can use differnt mics/processing...

...but it's still going to be the same piano.

[ernest828]

depends on the genre you`re recording. if its piano driven and its loud in the mix, use the real thing. for most pop productions, the piano is usually buried so...it doesn`t have to be absolutely wonderful.

 

peace,

ernest

[techristian]

Wouldn't that be:

For X= 1 to 88

 

I don't know. I'm a drummer. My only keyboards in this house are 5 octaves with 60-61 keys!

 

The point that I was trying to make was that EVERY NUANCE and variation of every single key would need to be recorded.

 

Dan

 

http://teachmedrums.com

[sign]

Here's another difference: my grand piano sounds different on any player. A player with a nice 'touche' will make it sound beautiful, a player who plays it without any respect for the instrument can make it sound plain bad.

 

My sampled piano sounds the same with any player.

[urk10]

Go for the samples.

[jmitch]

<<..a sampled pianoISa recording of a real piano! And if the sample is from a good library...then who ever recorded it probably had access to some top-of-the-line shit...and really knew what they were doing.>>

 

This was one of my points. Of course, there are differences, like each note resonating together in the wood of the same piano, and adjacent string vibration, but hey, it's pretty dang good close, and good sounding, you have to admit.

 

<>

 

Yes, indeed, however, you can't deny the fact that progressive hammer-action keyboards with weighted keys and digital pianos have gotten better and better, and feel very close to the real thing.

 

<>

 

Yes, this is a huge issue. But, as long as it sounds good, who cares really.

[jmitch]

I was just wondering if Wewus wanted to chime in on this one. He seems to know a fair amount about pianos.

[GY]

Originally posted by Duddits:

I think it depends on what you're doing. If you're recording solo piano, piano and voice, or piano and a few other things, that no question, use the real piano. However, if you're talking about a 67 track recording and the piano is only playing a few notes on the fourth beat of the second measure of every chorus, then a decent piano sample might be a better choice.

Exactly! Depends on the song. A $20 million dollar Bosendorfer may not be neccessary on a two-bit rock tune.

[theblue1]

I think a real piano (of reasonable quality) will almost always produce a more pleasing solo piano recording (if recorded properly). A big digital piano sound may be impressive off the top, but there's something about the real thing that wears better, seems to me.

[Raymar]

Can't do pitch bends with a real piano. When is somebody going to get around to implementing that feature?

 

steve