-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Will ASR be measuring pianos?
- Thread starter daftcombo
- Start date
Sure, if you can pay Amir to fly out to wherever the piano is...
Pretorious
Active Member
My guess is this is going to be a very similar situation to violins. There was that study that few, if any, could discern a difference between a cheap Yamaha violin versus a Stradivarius in double-blind tests. The most noticeable sound difference would be if strung with gut versus steel. But I won't digress into violins for this topic.
I assume that the biggest difference when judging the sound of a piano would be either the venue it is played in or the recording it's being played back from, depending on the method chosen. For the latter, mic and lid positioning will all have a factor on how a piano sounds in a recording. I tried years ago to double-blind via a program the differences in pianos between recordings and could not consistently tell the difference between a Bosendorfer against a Steinway. In fact, the only way I could notice a difference (and even that inconsistently) was if the recording was by Decca, due to a specific way they had recorded the pianos; the Bosendorfer gave off a very characteristic attack that was noticeable on these recordings.
I assume that the biggest difference when judging the sound of a piano would be either the venue it is played in or the recording it's being played back from, depending on the method chosen. For the latter, mic and lid positioning will all have a factor on how a piano sounds in a recording. I tried years ago to double-blind via a program the differences in pianos between recordings and could not consistently tell the difference between a Bosendorfer against a Steinway. In fact, the only way I could notice a difference (and even that inconsistently) was if the recording was by Decca, due to a specific way they had recorded the pianos; the Bosendorfer gave off a very characteristic attack that was noticeable on these recordings.
I always have in mind the project of measuring my digital piano from digitally recorded samples, avoiding any AD/DA conversion. It could be a nice work to understand how string resonance is simulated, etc. I don't have the time and not still the knowledge to do so, we'll see in the future.
watchnerd
Grand Contributor
ASR, sucking the fantasy and joy out of music.
I have the impression that live, the timbral differences between let's say Steinway, Bösendorfer and Yamaha are quite noticeable. When I've attended concerts or recitals with different brands I think I could tell the difference between them. And if you go to a piano store and try playing different models, they definitely sound different. This contrasts, and I agree, with the recordings, where it's almost impossible to tell the difference. Why is that?
watchnerd
Grand Contributor
Because recordings are an artiface, an impression of live musical instruments.
Most people, on most recordings, don't have a problem distinguishing between live instruments and recordings of the same.
There is so much that isn't captured accurately.
The colorations, spatial patterns, and distortions of the microphones alone already introduce an error factor.
I'd like to see some measurements of pipe organs.
DanielT
Major Contributor
Tip, I just saw this research article:
Microphone array measurements of a grand piano soundboard show similarities and differences between eigenmodes and forced oscillation patterns when playing notes on the instrument. During transients the driving point of the string shows enhanced energy radiation, still not as prominent as with the harpsichord. Lower frequencies are radiated stronger on the larger side of the soundboard wing shape, while higher frequencies are radiated stronger on the smaller side. A separate region at the larger part of the wing shape, caused by geometrical boundary conditions has a distinctly separate radiation behavior. High-speed camera recordings of the strings show energy transfer between strings of the same note. In physical models including hammer, strings, bridge, and soundboard the hammer movement is crucially necessary to produce a typical piano sound. Different bridge designs and bridge models are compared enhancing inharmonic sound components due to longitudinal-transversal coupling of the strings at the bridge.
www.researchgate.net
Microphone array measurements of a grand piano soundboard show similarities and differences between eigenmodes and forced oscillation patterns when playing notes on the instrument. During transients the driving point of the string shows enhanced energy radiation, still not as prominent as with the harpsichord. Lower frequencies are radiated stronger on the larger side of the soundboard wing shape, while higher frequencies are radiated stronger on the smaller side. A separate region at the larger part of the wing shape, caused by geometrical boundary conditions has a distinctly separate radiation behavior. High-speed camera recordings of the strings show energy transfer between strings of the same note. In physical models including hammer, strings, bridge, and soundboard the hammer movement is crucially necessary to produce a typical piano sound. Different bridge designs and bridge models are compared enhancing inharmonic sound components due to longitudinal-transversal coupling of the strings at the bridge.
Microphone array measurements, high-speed camera recordings, and geometrical finite-differences physical modeling of the grand piano | Request PDF
Request PDF | Microphone array measurements, high-speed camera recordings, and geometrical finite-differences physical modeling of the grand piano | Microphone array measurements of a grand piano soundboard show similarities and differences between eigenmodes and forced oscillation patterns... |...
www.researchgate.net
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 18, 2020
- Messages
- 1,285
- Likes
- 2,939
Because a piano is the third-hardest thing in the world to record well. Ideally, for complete integration of all a piano's sound-producing mechanisms, you want to be about 20' to 30' away, with the instrument set on a reflective floor, in a pleasantly reflective space, all of which is fine for human ears, because the brain can make sense of it all.
But microphones have no such discrimination, so all you get is a soupy mess. So you have to mike closer, which robs the result of the integrated impression, and leaves you with essentially selected characteristics, usually dominated by hammer impact and incomplete tone and resonances, which tend to sound generic in the end. It's a mess.
Agreed. I would like to add to that with Bell Tower Testing.
DanielT
Major Contributor
It would have been difficult to send a piano to Amir, then what about an pipe organ? He he
Attachments
If we're doing bells, we should also do cannons.Agreed. I would like to add to that with Bell Tower Testing.
I don't think he's talking about it in a particular "audiophile" way? Most of the terms he uses are actual physical aspects of the sound of a piano, not pixie dust. Btw, Steingraeber is generally regarded as one of the best piano makers in the world. They really are in a league of their own, along with three-four other manufacturers. It's the piano of the pianists, kind of, not of the people who try to impress others by namedropping "Steinway" at cocktail parties. Very expensive, but also stellar quality.
I also don't agree with the comparison with the world of violins. My experience as an amateur pianist who's also very interested in the science part of the piano is that the piano community is generally oriented towards science and evidence. The world of violins is for some reason much more oriented towards myths and old masters. As an example, you will never find a serious pianist or piano salesman who claims that a 19th century piano is better than a new one. Everybody knows that a piano deteriorates from the moment it is made (but good humidity control etc can slow the aging process).
That said, I am sure there would be some surprises if one does more blind testing of the sound of pianos. I'm fairly confident Steingraeber would do well, but I have my doubts about Steinway. There have been some tests done though, although mostly from the perspective of the player, not of the listener. Here's one such test where a somewhat cheaper piano (from Feurich) bested some of the more expensive competitors: https://www.feurich.com/wp-content/uploads/DIAPASON-2011-for-FEURICH-122-English.pdf
It should also be said that one can't really compare "Steingraeber vs Kawai vs Steinway" like one can with amplifiers, because each piano has its own particular characteristics - that's how it is with complex instruments made of wood. One Kawai will not sound exactly like another Kawai of the same model. But some broad tendencies can nevertheless be found.
Last edited:
nerdstrike
Active Member
Short version: He likes this piano. He might be getting a bit carried away.
When you get down to it, you select a piano by the touch, the sound, the volume you need, and whether you can afford it.
I've had a go on a couple of Steinways. One was contemporary, the other from 1908 but in good order. Both were easy to play, i.e. natural to get what I wanted from them and sounded excellent. Their rep is well earned even if you prefer a Fazioli or a Kawai or something without the price premium. I've also tried a quarter the price Bechstein and loved it... Perhaps I was less charmed, but then every piano is a little different or so it seems.
Either way, only the top professionals and venues can afford these fancy fancy pianos. Most of us have to slum it in the "best I can get for the money", and pick a sound that suits what we play the most. I wouldn't know what to do with an instrument this fine and powerful in the home!
When you get down to it, you select a piano by the touch, the sound, the volume you need, and whether you can afford it.
I've had a go on a couple of Steinways. One was contemporary, the other from 1908 but in good order. Both were easy to play, i.e. natural to get what I wanted from them and sounded excellent. Their rep is well earned even if you prefer a Fazioli or a Kawai or something without the price premium. I've also tried a quarter the price Bechstein and loved it... Perhaps I was less charmed, but then every piano is a little different or so it seems.
Either way, only the top professionals and venues can afford these fancy fancy pianos. Most of us have to slum it in the "best I can get for the money", and pick a sound that suits what we play the most. I wouldn't know what to do with an instrument this fine and powerful in the home!
But how would one get a piano on the klippel?
watchnerd
Grand Contributor
With lube.
Similar threads
