In Reply to: Re: The answer lies in the nature of the thing posted by Dr. S on March 10, 2007 at 19:23:03:
this presumes that the "indistinguishable" DSD copy of the microphone feed is completely indistinguishable from the sound of the actual piano being recorded. I would maintain that most listeners could easily identify nearly all recordings of a piano as such when compared to the sound of the instrument itself. Charles Hansen's post below pointed this out first, but to elaborate, the majority of piano recordings suffer for two reasons: the microphones used simply are inadequate, and they are placed poorly.The best attempts at portraying the sound of the piano — in my experience anyway — are on a few of the Opus 3 recordings, and the Harry James releases for Sheffield (these are all recorded in analog, BTW). IMHO, these succeed because of the minimalist placement techniques used. "Talk of the Town" on the Opus 3 Showcase SACD may, in fact, be the single best recording of a jazz piano.
Of course, on the other end of the spectrum are the mostly terrible sounding Concord Jazz recordings that unabashedly spread the piano across the entire soundfield.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Good answer, but - sgb 01:04:21 03/11/07 (3)
- Re: The representation of a thing, cannot be the thing itself - Dr. S 07:48:57 03/11/07 (0)
- Re: Good answer, but it also helps to have Speakers with a crossoverless design in the critical range of the piano. - Joe M 05:05:28 03/11/07 (1)
- Speakers AND CD Player! - Robertc88 06:03:49 03/12/07 (0)