How Recordings Are Made vs. Concert Hall Realism at Home: Piano Recordings

tmallin

WBF Technical Expert
May 19, 2010
967
375
1,625
71
Chicagoland
As I've mentioned here before, I think that one of the two main obstacles to achieving a reasonable facsimile of concert hall sound at home is how commercial recordings are made. A case in point is recordings of classical or other acoustic (unamplified) music played by solo piano.

The percentage of available commercial recordings of solo piano which capture a reasonable facsimile of what a concert grand piano actually sounds like from any audience location in a good concert hall is truly miniscule. Here is an example of where the usual stereo recording technique truly gets in the way of realistic home reproduction.

An audience perspective yields no appreciable left/right spatial separation among the piano keys. Even from five or ten feet away from a piano's open lid, I can hear neither left/right nor front/back separation of notes. And, believe me, I've tried to perceive such many times from that close up in rooms ranging from a living room to a large hall from the first row.

From the perspective of the pianist, or from a few feet directly behind the pianist, there would be modest left/right separation, especially if the lid has been taken off the piano for recording, but not nearly so much separation as on most piano recordings. The bass strings actually run diagonally across the piano case, so the left hand will not really be coming from the left. Besides, I have yet to be at any concert where such a perspective is offered to any audience seat. Some halls may have stage-surrounding balcony seats, but from that far away even if your balcony seat were directly behind the pianist there would not be much, if any, left/right audible.

Okay, it is POSSIBLE to arrange the audience so that some could be directly behind and close enough to the pianist to hear some left/right separation, as this picture shows. But this is a very uncommon arrangement, one I've never seen or experienced in a concert I've attended. And grand pianos are not intended to be heard from behind the performer. The lid is intended to direct sound out toward the audience. Notice where the coincident stereo microphone array has been placed in that picture; the microphone array, and the picture, are taken from the typical audience perspective.

In contrast to the typical audience perspective, the vast majority of commercially available solo piano recordings have considerable left/right spatial separation among the keys in terms of where the sound of each note seems to originate. In addition, many such recordings also capture a considerable front-to-back spatial difference among the keys. The degree of spatial separation among piano notes routinely demonstrable from stereo recordings played back at home cannot be experienced in concert, even by the pianist, much less someone sitting directly behind and close to the artist.

However, you would expect that a company and engineer as recording-quality conscious as Reference Recording’s Keith O. Johnson would choose realism when recording solo piano. You would thus expect this company to capture a true audience perspective on their solo piano recordings.

You would be wrong.

Take Reference Recordings RR-25, Nojima Plays Liszt, for example. Many who know recorded piano music find this recording to be among the most artistically satisfying available. Nojima has not made many recordings, but the ones he has done are usually artistically riveting and revelatory. This recording is no exception and, sonically, is in many ways as fine a piano recording as any. But Like most other piano recordings, the fact that the RR Liszt has a distinct left/right separation among the various notes makes it totally unrealistic for mimicking what one hears from any audience perspective in any concert. While RR did mix in an audience-location coincident stereo pair as part of the sonic pickup, the main microphones were located at pianist perspective and the lid of the piano was removed for the recording.

Many recordings have even more extreme spatial "note spread" on solo piano than the Reference Recordings example. Many, if not most, modern recordings of piano are made by putting the microphones under the lid of the piano, inside the case, and aiming one mike at the bass strings and the other at the treble strings. A video discussing the typical techniques can be viewed here.

There are very few audience-perspective recordings of solo piano which have ever been commercially released. One was a Sheffield Lab Direct-to-Disk recording of Lincoln Mayorga playing Brahms. It was made with a coincident stereo microphone (probably an AKG C-24 as with a number of other Sheffield Lab recordings) which yielded an audience-like perspective. Actually, I thought it was a rather strange recording, at once bangy (perhaps the piano itself?) and overly distant sounding in two-channel stereo. Others I’m aware of are all the James Boyk recordings on Performance Recordings. These use an actual Blumlein stereo array to record the piano from what sounds like an audience perspective.

I’m sure there are others, but those are the only commercial recordings of solo piano I’m aware of that offer a truly audience-like perspective on a grand piano, one which lacks the obvious left/right and/or front/back spacing among notes which is almost universal on such recordings but which, I repeat, one does not hear in concert from the audience during a solo piano recital. I’m aware of a few more recordings of groups of instruments made from a true audience perspective with a coincident stereo pair of mikes where the piano does not have the typical recorded spatial spread, but no others of solo piano.

Why should this be so? Well, purist though I am, I have to confess that even I find stereo solo piano recordings which lack "note spread" a bit boring or uninvolving. I suspect that the reason I do not find live solo piano recitals boring is that the visual image of the pianist playing adds sufficient additional sensory interest to keep me fully engaged.

I suspect that most others must agree with me on this, even most other audiophiles. Thus, while the RR Liszt recording is surreal or idealized rather than realistic in terms of spatiality, I find it both artistically AND sonically enthralling to listen to.

Stricter purists than I may well disagree. I agree that the RR Liszt piano recording probably would sound more concert-hall realistic if only the audience-location coincident stereo microphone had been used. But for solo piano recordings, surreal spatiality is just fine for me, thank you.
 

DonH50

Member Sponsor & WBF Technical Expert
Jun 22, 2010
3,947
306
1,670
Monument, CO
Great topic! I agree that a "purist" recording of the piano from the audience's perspective sounds a bit boring; it's essentially mono by then. I do not mind getting some stereo separation in the mix, although too much is bad (I like my 9' Bosendorfer to sound like a big piano, not like the keyboard is 9' across my listening area!) While there are many ways of recording the piano (approximately as many as sound engineers), I prefer a simple M-S or X-Y setup in the piano to get a bit of stereo "feel", plus a far-field omni mic ("far" being only a few feet) to pick up a little more distant sound to add to the mix and provide more of an illusion of "depth". I prefer this to adding more reverb later, although in the 20 - 30 years since I last did any serious recording reverb units have come a long way.

I am intrigued by the new earthworks piano mic system but have not had a chance to try it yet. Interesting, but (surpirse) a bit pricey.

A lot of audiophiles would be shocked by the processing that goes into most recordings, those old LL discs being notable exceptions.

Nice thread! - Don
 

GuidoCorona

Well-Known Member
Apr 23, 2010
327
38
413
Summerville (SC)
Rather than surreal, which involves a patina of ersatz reality, I prefer the term "hyperreal", which suggests an expansion of the 'real", rather than the artful replacement of certain elements. That is why, there still remains a measure of congruence in the best hyperreal recording... harmonic exposure for example, may often sound enhanced, but may not substantially depart from the 'pianoness' nature. In fact that special expanded feel/sound of the piano can be perceived live... but it requires the listener to place his/her head in contact with the piano... or inside the piano itself... all positions that are customarely frowned by authorities.

In fact, in the case of the perspective yielded by certain violin performances, such as Lara St. John on Bach passacaglia, a live listener would either be stabbed in the eye by the bow... or arrested for his/her ears indulging in a close encounter of the most letcherous kind.

Be it as it may, we need to start thinking that recorded music is not necessarily the 'false' reproduction of a 'true' event... It is just a different perspective of a work of art, and as such, equally valid/true/real as the live event.

Guido
 

Mark (Basspig) Weiss

Well-Known Member
Aug 3, 2010
682
37
940
New Milford, CT
www.basspig.com
When I make recordings in the concert hall, I use a custom-designed grid with a cluster of five cardioid pattern large-diaphragm condenser mics. Five channels are recorded with 24-bit/96KHz resolution.
This cluster is usually positioned 18' above the 5th row, center.
The cardioid patterns, coupled with the inherently low noise and transient response of the large diaphragm mics, results in a level of detail that normally requires close-miking, while maintaining the natural balance that the audience hears. It's uncanny to listen to, because it's like no other concert recording made today: the smallest nuances are heard on a blanket of silence; the hall acoustic is nicely-balanced; the overall balance of the orchestra is impeccable.

Peter Aczel of The Audio Critic had this to say about my first concert recording with the GBSO in October 2007:

“I played your Beethoven CD through my reference system and heard truly excellent sound. The bass/midrange/treble balance is much better than on nearly all commercial CDs; the low-frequency impact without any actual boost is particularly noticeable. The hall ambience is not excessive, as it often is; it's right on the money. ... I'd love to hear what you could do with the Philadelphia Orchestra, or the Cleveland Orchestra, or the Berlin Philharmonic in their native habitats.”

Peter Aczel, The Audio Critic


Needless to say, I was rather delighted to receive this rather generous praise, from a critic known to speak bluntly about shortcomings in a product under review.

You see, my intent was always to bring the concert hall listening experience into the home. When played on my system at home, particularly the Surround Sound version, there is a palpable sense of being there, although the other tactile sensations of the concert hall---the seating, the smells, the HVAC air flow, etc., were obviously missing---but short of that, the sonic qualities of the performance were remarkably realistic.

Most concert recordings suffer from the 'too many mikes' syndrome, and mikes too close to instruments. We don't hear a cello with our ear 14" from the body of the instrument. We here a combination of the 360° radiation of that cello, bouncing off the walls, the proscenium, backdrops, etc., in combination with the direct sound from the cello. I didn't even mention the interaural delays and spacial cues that are totally messed up with close miking. Few recording engineers choose to use cardioid pattern mikes from a high vantage point, but the advantages are a lot like using a telephoto lens--you get up close intimate detail, yet retain the balance of sounds across the stage.

Recording something like solo piano involves many artistic decisions. I use a similar approach to Max Wilcox's method of placing twin microphones at opposite ends of the keyboard, elevated high up on stands, with an open or full stick on the lid of the piano. It gets a nice stereo image, but retains the balance of the piano across the scale and without unnatural hammer action noises.​

I use no EQ or compression of any kind, much to the chagrin of some of my clients, who actually want to change reality.. ie., make the piano sound as if it were played with more force. In situations like that, I've had to add small amounts of multi-band compression, with good results that the client was happy with. Of course, for me, it's heresey to even think of adding any type of processing to a recording!​
 

MylesBAstor

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
11,236
81
1,725
New York City
When I make recordings in the concert hall, I use a custom-designed grid with a cluster of five cardioid pattern large-diaphragm condenser mics. Five channels are recorded with 24-bit/96KHz resolution.
This cluster is usually positioned 18' above the 5th row, center.
The cardioid patterns, coupled with the inherently low noise and transient response of the large diaphragm mics, results in a level of detail that normally requires close-miking, while maintaining the natural balance that the audience hears. It's uncanny to listen to, because it's like no other concert recording made today: the smallest nuances are heard on a blanket of silence; the hall acoustic is nicely-balanced; the overall balance of the orchestra is impeccable.

Peter Aczel of The Audio Critic had this to say about my first concert recording with the GBSO in October 2007:

“I played your Beethoven CD through my reference system and heard truly excellent sound. The bass/midrange/treble balance is much better than on nearly all commercial CDs; the low-frequency impact without any actual boost is particularly noticeable. The hall ambience is not excessive, as it often is; it's right on the money. ... I'd love to hear what you could do with the Philadelphia Orchestra, or the Cleveland Orchestra, or the Berlin Philharmonic in their native habitats.”

Peter Aczel, The Audio Critic


Needless to say, I was rather delighted to receive this rather generous praise, from a critic known to speak bluntly about shortcomings in a product under review.

You see, my intent was always to bring the concert hall listening experience into the home. When played on my system at home, particularly the Surround Sound version, there is a palpable sense of being there, although the other tactile sensations of the concert hall---the seating, the smells, the HVAC air flow, etc., were obviously missing---but short of that, the sonic qualities of the performance were remarkably realistic.

Most concert recordings suffer from the 'too many mikes' syndrome, and mikes too close to instruments. We don't hear a cello with our ear 14" from the body of the instrument. We here a combination of the 360° radiation of that cello, bouncing off the walls, the proscenium, backdrops, etc., in combination with the direct sound from the cello. I didn't even mention the interaural delays and spacial cues that are totally messed up with close miking. Few recording engineers choose to use cardioid pattern mikes from a high vantage point, but the advantages are a lot like using a telephoto lens--you get up close intimate detail, yet retain the balance of sounds across the stage.

Recording something like solo piano involves many artistic decisions. I use a similar approach to Max Wilcox's method of placing twin microphones at opposite ends of the keyboard, elevated high up on stands, with an open or full stick on the lid of the piano. It gets a nice stereo image, but retains the balance of the piano across the scale and without unnatural hammer action noises.​

I use no EQ or compression of any kind, much to the chagrin of some of my clients, who actually want to change reality.. ie., make the piano sound as if it were played with more force. In situations like that, I've had to add small amounts of multi-band compression, with good results that the client was happy with. Of course, for me, it's heresey to even think of adding any type of processing to a recording!​

I think that the piano is not as easy to record as people think :) Take a Bosendorfer which combines frequency response with dynamics. Add in a side order of inner detail, harmonics, etc and that makes for a challenging experience.

Then there's the artistic factor. Take someone like Rubinstein who wanted his piano front and center and bigger than life. Rubinstein felt that his "fans" bought his LPs to hear him! Then there's those who can't stand any little mistake and splice together almost every bar :(

My reference for piano recordings (not to mention playing) were the early '60s Alan Silver/David Jones Connoisseur Society recordings of Alan Silver. Done on SOTA modded gear including an Ampex machine running at 30 ips, these recordings present a wonderful balance between perspective, pllaying and sense of space. Plus Moravec's Debussy, Chopin and Beethoven are mouth watering! Still they're sadly hothing like hearing the man perform these composiitions live. Moravec's ability to define textures is amazing.
 

Ethan Winer

Banned
Jul 8, 2010
1,231
3
0
75
New Milford, CT
When I make recordings in the concert hall, I use a custom-designed grid with a cluster of five cardioid pattern large-diaphragm condenser mics. Five channels are recorded with 24-bit/96KHz resolution. This cluster is usually positioned 18' above the 5th row, center.

You should post a photo of your microphone rig. Do you happen to have a pic taken at the hall showing the rig flying overhead? If not, next time we video a concert together, remind me and I'll bring my still camera.

--Ethan
 

LesAuber

Well-Known Member
Jun 21, 2010
141
0
361
Interesting thread. Solo piano is always a given when auditioning equipment. I agree with the shortcomings of the typical audience perspective and prefer the recording to give some sense of the width and depth of the instrument without having it sound like I'm inside of it.
 

Mark (Basspig) Weiss

Well-Known Member
Aug 3, 2010
682
37
940
New Milford, CT
www.basspig.com
You should post a photo of your microphone rig. Do you happen to have a pic taken at the hall showing the rig flying overhead? If not, next time we video a concert together, remind me and I'll bring my still camera.

--Ethan

Yes, I do actually have some photos of the mic rig.. they were taken with a DSLR, but the flash didn't reach quite that far and the photos are dark and noisy. I'd have gotten a better photo if I shoot it with our HD Cam with more light sensitivity.

The mic setup is proprietary, so I don't post it on the internet for obvious reasons. :)
 

muralman1

New Member
Jul 7, 2010
479
0
0
Sacramento Ca
I have that CD Tom was talking a lot about, "Nojima Plays Liszt." It is easily my most satisfying solo piano recording. That is because of the wonderful accuracy in tone, inflection, and piano warmth. I can appreciate the super realist point of view. I live in that camp when I can. Live performances predominate my collections. Whenever I am watching a pianist, I perceive bass is left and treble right. That is because the pianist's hands strike on the left and right making those notes. You see, there is an optical side to every performance.... almost. Hearing the bass on the left and treble right fits right into my visage of the pianist's hands. It is only natural.
 

c1ferrari

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
May 15, 2010
2,162
51
1,770
Dear Tom,

Empirical record :) objectively conveyed...

We, the listeners of produced material, are routinely unaware of the recording venue, mics, mixing, and mastering...

Stereo is an artifact...
 

Phelonious Ponk

New Member
Jun 30, 2010
8,677
23
0
You guys have different ideas regarding what's boring. I have plenty of old jazz recordings made with just a few mics, live or in-studio - some stereo, some mono - all upon which the piano is mono without a sense of key imaging. They're not boring. Evan's "Waltz With Debby" is not boring, and it's definitely an audience perspective piano recording. Miles' "Round About Midnight" is a studio recording, but mono, period. Not boring.

With that said, if you're going to do a modern studio recording of a piano, give me that sense of spread and space. Why not? Trying to emulate a concert hall experience from a modern studio recording is futile. Enjoy the art you have, not the reproduction you imagine you could have.

P
 

microstrip

VIP/Donor
May 30, 2010
20,806
4,698
2,790
Portugal
I would like to remember that going to a piano recital in a Concert Hall is an audio-video experiment. You can be far from the piano, but if you are used to listen to a real piano, you get many clues from the way the piano player moves, the movement of his hands, arms, shoulders, back and even head increase our perception of the music (HP of TAS wrote an interesting essay many years ago about going to the Concert Hall and listening with closed eyes).

When you listen at home you do not have the images any more, but your brain is recreating the live piano and some recordings do it better than others. The RR Nojima- Liszt is one of them. If it is because of the way it was recorded, may be others could learn with Prof Keith Johnson.
BTW, I do not listen in the near-field position that TMallin uses at home. Perhaps this recording becomes exaggerated and unnatural in this configuration. But for my Sound Labs at 4 meters it is perfect.

If you want another exceptional piano performance buy DG447 431-2 : Maurizio Pollini playing three movements of Stravinsky Petrouchka’s , among others. You should guess the speed of Pollini fingers flying over the keyboard with less than 5% error if you have a good system :)
 

MylesBAstor

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
11,236
81
1,725
New York City
I have read him since he first started in print and on the web. Your technical side can learn a lot from him. He balances out the endless meaningless dribble spewed by some reviewers who change components like underwear.

Tom

You're kidding, right? Look at who's calling the kettle black: a person who with zero scruples eg. having a financial interest never disclosed in a product he reviews eg. the Fourier speaker review (and a Carver review that appeared in the co's press clippings but was never printed). That's a real person who to put your trust in.
 

DonH50

Member Sponsor & WBF Technical Expert
Jun 22, 2010
3,947
306
1,670
Monument, CO
As a music-lover and a musician as well as an audiophile and engineer I think balance is important. Listening too much to the "system" instead of the music can be a trap that robs enjoyment of what really matters, imo. Sure, I enjoy a great recording on my system better than a bad one on my son's boom box, but I am happy with what I have. I posted my "life stages of an audiophile" someplace here... Long pause... Found it! Re-posted it below for your enjoyment. - Don

***

Musicians are generally concerned only with how something sounds, and are more inclined to comment on the flatted fifth than the horrible distortion from the speakers...

I have noticed a trend, sort of a "life cycle", with audiophiles:
  1. In the beginning, it's all about the music, and anything that plays LOUD is great. Happiness reigns.
  2. Upon introduction to a good system, all of a sudden good sound becomes a real goal, and the upgrade path begins.
  3. In the quest for perfection, and in the absence of full trust in their ears, measurements become the easy way to assess a system's performance. It becomes a numbers game, with the winner determined by the greatest bandwidth, lowest distortion, and most watts.
  4. A period of despondency often follows as the budding audiophile realizes there will never be enough money nor specifications good enough for that "perfect" system.
  5. Finally, acceptance that what really matters is the music, and a wide range of systems can provide reasonably realistic playback of what truly matters. Happiness begins anew.

All IMO - Don
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing