I'm posed with a situation that is pretty new to me. Hopefully someone here has already pondered this and has found a good answer.

The situation involves a pianist playing a 4-hand duet with herself. We need to record the first piano part in stereo, which is simple. Then we need to playback that recording (stereo would be nice, mono would be acceptable) for use as a sync track, and simultaneously record her playing the second piano part in stereo.

Although it will complicate things, I think I will be forced to do the playback with a speaker, rather than headphones. Thus, I will probably try to subtract out some of the bleed from the playback, from the recording of the second part. (I will do my best to minimize this problem with judicious mic placement, but it won't be perfect.) Because of this probable need to null out, I would like to have the first two tracks *perfectly* in sync with the second two tracks (i.e. zero-sample drift).

I realize there will be some issues with nulling: the time delay from speakers back to the mics, and also the fact that the speaker response is not at all flat. Be that as it may, I would like to have zero-sample drift between the two pairs of tracks.

I would like to find one piece of hardware that can play two tracks, and simultaneously record two tracks, using the same clock for both functions. Does anyone know of such a device? Suggestions?

Other approaches? (I could use a separate playback machine, and then re-record that audio on two tracks of a four-track recording, with the second-part mic on the other two tracks. That might be easier and/or cheaper, might be harder and/or more expensive.)

Since the forum has been rather sparse for the last few days, I thought I'd liven things up with this off-the-wall scenario. Thanks in advance for any suggestions!

Why will you have to use a loudspeaker for playback? What about using a single very high quality earbud for the playback of the first part? That could be hidden pretty easily and still leave her one ear open to listen to her own second part.

Given the volume of playback necessary for her to hear the first part over her playing the second part, I doubt you will be able to absolutely cleanly record the second part if you use a loudspeaker.

There are plenty of 4-track recorders that will playback 2 and record the second 2 tracks using the same internal clock. I think the human element (player), and the inevitable bleed from loudspeaker to mics will be the more difficult to solve problems.

What if you record both the first part AND the second part as audio-only first? Then record the video (are you recording video?) using the combined parts as both playback sync for the video performance and as the actual audio in the final product. The scratch audio recorded during the video will be discarded, like in a normal music video shoot.

One of these - M-AUDIO - ProFire 610 - High-Definition 6-in/10-out FireWire Audio Interface with Octane Preamp Technology (http://www.m-audio.com/products/en_us/ProFire610.html)

and a copy of ProTools will do it for sure.

+1 on using a very hide-able ear bud for monitor.

Jay:

I think I will have to use a loudspeaker for playback because the pianist isn't willing to use an earbud. Her job is to play the piano. My job is to solve the audio puzzle.

If this project is going to work at all, the technician will need to accomodate the musician. I can't change that. Nor do I think it would be right to try to: if a musician is forced into an uncomfortable situation, the performance likely will suffer, and this musician is used to hearing another piano (or another pianist sharing the same piano), with both ears, in order to adjust dynamics and subtle nuances of the performance.)

Yes, I'm sure I won't be able to get a 100% clean recording of the second part, given some inevitable bleed from the playback speaker. That's what prompts my question, and that's stated in the question.

Mind you, the bleed won't be terrible. I will mic the piano as closely as reasonable, without getting an "up-close rock piano" sound. And I'll keep the playback speaker reasonably close to the pianist, so the level [at the mics] will be fairly low. Glenn Gould's humming isn't overpowering, it's just sometimes audible in the background. I am hoping I can achieve a similarly low level of bleed. In fact, if I'm lucky, I won't need to tinker to remove it at all. (I think most of the pieces are "one piano four hands" rather than "two pianos four hands"; so ultimately the two pairs of tracks will be mixed together anyway... I just want to be prepared to avoid any obvious coloration from the playback loudspeaker.)

Be that as it may, I would still like to use a single machine for simultaneous playback and recording. So, as I originally asked: Can you recommend any specific recorders that would be appropriate for this usage? I guess I could read a lot of catalogs and spec sheets, but I thought it would be more efficient to get some recommendations from someone on this forum with relevant experience.

Unfortunately, your last question is moot, because in reality we will have to record the second piano part using loudspeaker playback of the first piano part. So the question of when we shoot video doesn't help with the audio question I originally posed.

Chris:

Thanks for the M-Audio lead. I will read through the literature and see what it's all about. I certainly can't complain about the price.

OK, an earbud would be nice, but in this case it really won't fly. And I have to sympathize with the performer. Back in my college days, I did some glee club singing. It was a matter of hearing the other people around me, and adjusting my voice to blend in correctly. I don't think I could have done that with any kind of headphone or earbud that prevented me from hearing the other voices and my own voice all mixed together acoustically.

I suppose if I had been singing a solo track, against a pre-recorded chorus, I could have just done my best, and let the correct mix evolve in post. But it would have required a new learning curve on my part, before I could have done that comfortably.

With the current recording project, such a learning curve just isn't an option. I fully understand that classical music is a special animal. It's going to be enough of a learning curve for this pianist (who's used to sharing the bench with another pianist, or facing another pianist at a second piano) just to listen to loudspeaker playback. Blocking even one ear with an earbud would be too drastic a change. The pianist doesn't want to do it, and IMHO that's where it ends. I'm sure there is another [technical] option, and I feel I'd be way out of line to tell this pianist how to play her music on her instrument.

There are a bunch of amateur ways - and one professional way.

Which you use depends on your budget.

All the amateur ways require workarounds to balance a recording using live mics in a sound field where another recording at nearly the level of the original piano is taking place. As you note, the issue is that you can't isolate the results, everything gets mixed up.

Which is precisely why the pros seldom do live on stage recordings this way. The secret is that they virtually NEVER use actual acoustic pianos. It's really common for touring bands to roll a baby grand on stage - but that's just a shell into which they've installed a top quality sample driven electronic keyboard.

The digital signal from the performance can therefore be split out electonrically with no danger of feedback or other issues. You can send it to the PA at whatever level is needed, and a secondary feed to the stage monitors, and a third, perfectly clean version can be split off for a recording - and any or all of these can be as loud as you like since there are no microphones picking up the sound to worry about.

That's the professional problem solver here. But it requires enough budget for a quality keyboard and a stage monitor mixer who can feed the correct levels to the performer so that they can play to the prior recording as IF it's live, knowing all the time that their new performance is being recorded cleanly without any bleed at all for proper mixing in post.

Source: A good friend of mine is a top level piano tech that tours with giant stage shows of the big artists everyone on the planet has heard about. His job is to service and maintain these keyboards. He travels with at least 3 fully functioning keyboards and can totally swap one out of a "dummy" grand piano in about two minutes flat if something goes bad. Show business!

FWIW.

I've just started the latest project for a concert pianist, and completely agree with the way their needs (not wants) have been presented here.

I'm recording in the pianists home because he will not play an alternative piano - the music was composed on this instrument, with two ears and we've tried these options before. One eared monitoring doesn't work. he simply cannot play accurately with one ear blocked. In the music room is also a high quality stage piano he uses for live work. We were experimenting with recording one piece that I need to add some sound effects to - and we spent a long time just getting him to the end on the plastic piano.

Speakers will be a major problem. A grand piano (which I assume is what we're talking about - although the problem is similar for an upright) is not a point source, so attempts to 'phase-out' the monitor sound don't work that well - however, one old stage trick that does help let you null out the monitors is to use two - but wire one with the polarity reversed. if these are equidistant from the mic (singular) the nulling out works better. If you are recording in stereo - less effective of course. Small compact speakers can be stuck on microphone stands and placed facing towards the ears, but with their backs to the mics - that also helps. The addition of video to a multi-track recording really complicates things - most of the solutions look visually naff! Getting the recording right, if you can do it, then trying very hard to convince the pianist to just play along for the second part, without the speakers visible may be best for you - but they'll probably hate it. At the end of the day, it may be best to do a rough recording and let them decide on the success of the recordings - with a reshoot to solve the problem once they've understood what went wrong. My technique now is very different from the original method, because he composed pieces so hard he could only just play what he'd composed! What we now do is record the 2-3 minute compositions in short blocks - based on ending at the end of a musical phrase, then recording the next section and then editing them together. A recording session can generate hundreds of takes. He can detect minute tenp changes between them, but I compile the edits from the best ones - then he sits with me and we make minute changes, and perform crossfades to match them up. On the video versions - these edits are ideal places to cut anyway. The biggest hassle and potential cockup is writing accurate notes. I get the pianist to announce each attempt. "Allegro Vitore in Gm - second section take 6, last one ok but I can do better". This really helps.

Based on doing this a lot, with a simply excellent, but demanding pianist on a superb instrument - record the audio and video for the first part - then record the second part with very close to the ear, and quieter small monitors wired with one reverse polarity. Lastly record the video for part 2 as a play-along.

Expect resistance to the play-along, but visually the isolation technique looks dreadful - BUT - to get the separation you, it's essential. Spill will ruin any attempt to use more distant monitors, and nulling it out will really spoil the sound

Bill:

I appreciate your reply but based on the actual situation, which I have tried to explain in detail, a lot of your comments do not apply to my scenario. The key to the disconnect is in your saying that "... the pros seldom do live on stage recordings this way. The secret is that they virtually NEVER use actual acoustic pianos. It's really common for touring bands..."

If you think that your description is the only description that applies to "pros" then I think you have a rather uninformed view of classical music. Do you mean that Van Cliburn wasn't a pro? That Leonard Bernstein wasn't a pro? That Leon Fleischer and Martha Argerich aren't pros?

If you read my posts, I am talking about a classically-trained pianist, playing classical music for two pianists (4-hands) playing one or two pianos. Period. There are no touring bands. There are no other instruments at all. It's not a live performance with audience; it's a recording session. There is nobody mixing for stage monitors, because there are no stage monitors at all, and no reinforcement, either. These are classical piano duets, and I can't imagine classical music ever being performed on anything other than real pianos. That's what I'm asking about here... not amplified synthetic sound and "touring bands." It's not "show business," it's classical music.

Thanks for your insight into an entirely different kind of performance. It may well be useful for somebody, some day, and it makes for interesting reading. But, as I said, it doesn't apply to my question.

--

Paul,

Thank you for chiming in! I knew eventually I'd hear from someone who would understand and sympathize with my dilemma.

Your point about bleed is well taken. I will be recording in a real-world acoustical environment, not an anechoic chamber. So there will be multiple reflections from the speaker(s) into two mics. It won't be possible to completely null it out, nor will I try to do so.

I was hoping to get away with one playback speaker, and start the playback track with some digitally-generated clicks. Then I could at least time-align the recording of those clicks on the two mics, and partially null out the recording of the direct sound... and let the reflections fall where they may. (As I said, in a typical performance, both piano parts will be mixed anyway, so a small amount of bleed won't be a game killer.)

I definitely like your idea of a small playback speaker on a stand, near the pianist. That way, I can have a playback at a realistic level at the pianist's ears yet have a much lower soundfield at the mic location.

I'll have to ponder the reverse-phase playback trick. It might work if I were recording in mono, but I anticipate recording this with a pair of mics. Perhaps if I record X-Y with the mics essentially in the same location... hmmm. This might be interesting to try, although it wouldn't be my first choice for micing a piano.

Your project certainly sounds interesting, and a lot more demanding than what I anticipate doing. I pray that I won't have anywhere near that amount of editing to do. And since we'll have the playback track for reference, matching tempo should be less problematic. That only leaves matching level and matching expression in general. Sigh...

I wish you luck with your project, and thanks again for your suggestions!

I don't understand why the options are limited to a mono earbud or speakers for the playback. What you're describing is standard practice for tracking and the way it's usually done is for the artist to listen to the playback of the previously recorded tracks through headphones while recording the new ones. For recording all you need is your DAW such as Adobe Audition and an audio interface that is full-duplex capable (most decent interfaces are). Mic the piano as for a normal stereo recording and record your first stereo track. Play the track back through headphones for the artist to record the second part to. Mix enough of the live signal into the playback track for her to hear herself properly. The result will be two stereo tracks completely in sync with each other on the workstation's timeline. You can even record an entire band this way ... first laying down a click track, then the drum tracks, then the bass line, then the various instruments and vocals. Multitracking like this is a very common technique in the pop recording world. Five or six years ago I happened upon an instructional video of Roger McQuinn (The Byrds) demonstrating the technique as he recorded what became a Grammy winning album in his living room with nothing more than decent mics and headphones and a Dell laptop running Audition. You might Google it and see if it's still available.

Gregg, are you trying to record audio only or audio and video? If it's audio only, then Steve's description of how to do it is how the "pros" do it. A simple M-Audio Fastrack or similar device will do it. You could even go really cheap and get an Alesis Multimix USB for about $150.

If you are want to also capture it on video so you don't want to see the headphones, you're a lot more limited. If the artist won't live with headphones or an ear bud, they your workflow is the same except you send the first track to some monitors instead of the headphone. The problem as you've noted is isolating the second piano performance. It can be done so that it is acceptable but it won' be as clean.

Well, then we disagree. The parts of my response that I think DO apply have to do with the nature of sound recoding and reproduction.

BTW, I brought up the "touring band" stuff to highlight the process of ISOLATION of instruments to achieve quality - not to imply that a touring rock band and a classical performance are similar. The point is that the techniques that work on stage for the former - may be the key to solving your frustrations with the latter - using the kind of modern tools that Brenstein and Cliburn simply did not have access to in their performance eras. As to Mr. Fleisher (now 84) and Ms.Argerich now what? 74? I doubt they every considered recording other than the way they've been doing it for their entire careers - which may or may not reflect the current state of the recording arts.Tradition is a powerful thing. But not always the best solution when new techniques are at hand.

Anyway...

The task you've set for yourself is demanding because, at least in my view, of the unyeilding (and eternal!) physics of sound propagation.

A live two piano duet creates incredibly complex harmonic richness. It's the interplay of vibration with the acoustic space.

Now suddenly, you want to record one of those pianos - and then record a second piano and try to re-create the merging harmonic profile of the second with the first. But if you think about it, every technique (especially those that rely on phase cancellation playback mixed with the second performance) simply can not re-create anything close to the complex interplay of harmonics that a two piano simultaneous recording will create.

So I would tend to argue that they are flawed approaches from square one.

The only way I can think of that you could accomplish anything better would be to install a theoretical "perfect" playback chain that actually reproduced the recording of the original piano with such pristine fidelity that the reproduction would blend with the new performance as if the two instruments were actually interacting in the space - and that's kinda impossible with modern playback gear, as far as I understand current transducer limitations.

Now, I don't do this type of classical recording for a living. So if you guys do and tell me that the system you're using is what gets the best resuts, I'll bow to your superior experience.

But I've been in and around sound and recording for a lot of years, and I simply can't imagine that any system that mixes a purposely phase cancelled playback of Piano 1 - with an "open mic" pristine recording of piano performance 2 is going to be nearer to the actual sound of duet than mixing two "isolated" recordings of the two performances in post.

If the pianist is unwilling to isolate performance 2 from performance 1 using the proven techniques of headphone isolated multi-tracking - then the next best thing I believe would be to isolate each recording and you simply can't do that if there's an open mic present while doing first performance playback.

That's how I see it. If you can articulate why I'm wrong, I'd be interested - and would be most willing to change my thinking if the explanation is at all compelling.

Sound is like light. You turn on a red bulb, even in a room with generally white light, then the red will be noticably mixed into the scene.

To me, any playback of the initial recording - audibly - to allow the pianist to synchronize their playing of the second part, inexorably damages the recording of the second part.

That's how I see it, anyway. Educate me if I'm wrong. I'm very willing to listen.

(BTW, if you have two open mics, I'm not sure I'd count on using phase cancellation as a way to suppress the first recording. Remember the temporal delay between two open mics means that any "mixed" recording will be hopelessly mis-aligned as to phase since room reflecting signals will be hitting the two diaphragms at different times and likely causing a good bit of unavoidable comb filtering. FWIW.)



Bill:

I appreciate your reply but based on the actual situation, which I have tried to explain in detail, a lot of your comments do not apply to my scenario. The key to the disconnect is in your saying that "... the pros seldom do live on stage recordings this way. The secret is that they virtually NEVER use actual acoustic pianos. It's really common for touring bands..."

If you think that your description is the only description that applies to "pros" then I think you have a rather uninformed view of classical music. Do you mean that Van Cliburn wasn't a pro? That Leonard Bernstein wasn't a pro? That Leon Fleischer and Martha Argerich aren't pros?

If you read my posts, I am talking about a classically-trained pianist, playing classical music for two pianists (4-hands) playing one or two pianos. Period. There are no touring bands. There are no other instruments at all. It's not a live performance with audience; it's a recording session. There is nobody mixing for stage monitors, because there are no stage monitors at all, and no reinforcement, either. These are classical piano duets, and I can't imagine classical music ever being performed on anything other than real pianos. That's what I'm asking about here... not amplified synthetic sound and "touring bands." It's not "show business," it's classical music.

Thanks for your insight into an entirely different kind of performance. It may well be useful for somebody, some day, and it makes for interesting reading. But, as I said, it doesn't apply to my question.

--

Paul,

Thank you for chiming in! I knew eventually I'd hear from someone who would understand and sympathize with my dilemma.

Your point about bleed is well taken. I will be recording in a real-world acoustical environment, not an anechoic chamber. So there will be multiple reflections from the speaker(s) into two mics. It won't be possible to completely null it out, nor will I try to do so.

I was hoping to get away with one playback speaker, and start the playback track with some digitally-generated clicks. Then I could at least time-align the recording of those clicks on the two mics, and partially null out the recording of the direct sound... and let the reflections fall where they may. (As I said, in a typical performance, both piano parts will be mixed anyway, so a small amount of bleed won't be a game killer.)

I definitely like your idea of a small playback speaker on a stand, near the pianist. That way, I can have a playback at a realistic level at the pianist's ears yet have a much lower soundfield at the mic location.

I'll have to ponder the reverse-phase playback trick. It might work if I were recording in mono, but I anticipate recording this with a pair of mics. Perhaps if I record X-Y with the mics essentially in the same location... hmmm. This might be interesting to try, although it wouldn't be my first choice for micing a piano.

Your project certainly sounds interesting, and a lot more demanding than what I anticipate doing. I pray that I won't have anywhere near that amount of editing to do. And since we'll have the playback track for reference, matching tempo should be less problematic. That only leaves matching level and matching expression in general. Sigh...

I wish you luck with your project, and thanks again for your suggestions!

In a quick review of this thread, I didn't see any explicit statement that this was a live performance with an audience vs. a recording session?

I would be strongly tempted to consider using some small monitor speakers in perhaps unconventional positions. One possibility would be to place a pair of small (5-inch) speakers on either side of the music stand. With the speakers relatively close to the performer's ears and aimed AWAY from the business-end of the instrument, you can reduce the playback bleed into the recording microphones.

Or, alternately, a pair of small monitors on mic stands just behind the performer's head. Again to get the speakers as close to the ears as possible to reduce the amount of acoustic bleed into the recording microphones.

I would also remind the producer/client that limitations imposed on the recording situation will result in unavoidable compromises in the quality of the recording. In the immortal words of Scotty, engineer of the star-ship Enterprise: "Ye cannae change the laws of physics!"

It's not so much a matter of whether we disagree. It's just that we're talking about two different things, or talking about the same thing from two different perspectives.

You're talking about
the current state of the recording arts.
and what is technically possible.

I'm talking about what this particular performer is willing to do. The only playback option this performer is willing to consider is loudspeaker playback. Therefore, some of the techniques you suggest, while they are valid as techniques, are not applicable in this case. They're current, they're interesting, and I don't question that they work technically when they're used, but they don't answer my question: my question relates to what options I have with this situation which is defined by what this performer is willing to do.

I don't disagree with everyone's comments about how difficult it will be to achieve any useful degree of cancellation. That is a big bugaboo. I understand why the problem exists, and I understand that it will be very imperfect.

if you have two open mics, I'm not sure I'd count on using phase cancellation as a way to suppress the first recording. Remember the temporal delay between two open mics means that any "mixed" recording will be hopelessly mis-aligned as to phase since room reflecting signals will be hitting the two diaphragms at different times and likely causing a good bit of unavoidable comb filtering.

Yes, I understand that and I agree completely. The more I think about this, I'm concluding that maybe I should be thinking not about cancellation, but rather about addition. Perhaps I should strive for the best possible playback (within reason), keep the level as low as possible (within reason), and then consider the bleed from that to be a small part of the sound from the "first piano." Then I can add in the direct track from the first piano, to come up with the final mix. It won't be perfectly accurate reproduction, but it might just sound like a slightly different piano, and be entirely believable and acceptable.

I still need to think long and hard about time relationships between the playback speaker and the "second piano" mics, but perhaps there's a solution lurking in here somewhere.

Given all that, I'm going to take a long look at the M-Audio gear that Chris Medico recommended, it might make this all possible. And I'll clearly need to perform a few tests to see if the above scenario produces acceptable results.

Thanks again for all the suggestions.

In a quick review of this thread, I didn't see any explicit statement that this was a live performance with an audience vs. a recording session?

Richard:

It's buried in the third paragraph of post #8. It's a recording session with no audience. That gives me some extra leeway.

I'll need to try some tests with different speaker locations, before the actual session. Your suggestions sound pretty valid to me. Luckily I can play a few notes on the piano, so the test will have some validity as far as checking levels and bleed, etc.

I would also remind the producer/client that limitations imposed on the recording situation will result in unavoidable compromises in the quality of the recording.

Yes, they're willing to trust me to "do my best," whatever that may be... I just don't want to use this particular scenario as an excuse to do less than the best I can possibly do.

Gregg, what is the reason the artist does not want to use some form of isolated listening? If it is that they won't be able to hear themselves playing, I think that is has already been addressed that they will be able to hear themselves play along with the first recorded track.

From working with actors and musicians I know that everyone of them has their own particular desires and way of performing. Just curious about this one.

Gregg, what is the reason the artist does not want to use some form of isolated listening? If it is that they won't be able to hear themselves playing, I think that is has already been addressed that they will be able to hear themselves play along with the first recorded track.

From working with actors and musicians I know that everyone of them has their own particular desires and way of performing. Just curious about this one.

This is a very valid question and having been audio engineering for more than 30 years, I have come across many musicians who were very unhappy with the idea of working with headphones. This is usually due to a lack of experience of working that way, or not using high quality equipment and competent engineers.

If their unwillingness is due to a purist stance, then I would argue that recording a piano duet without a second pianist is moving well away from a purist recording.

My own experience is that working for a short time with a properly mixed sound and good quality studio headphones, will quickly ease their fears. This will be especially true if they feel that they will not be able to hear their live piano properly. Again drawing on my own experience, I have found that many musicians with the no headphone view, frequently quickly start to prefer it as it enables them to totally focus on the music.

Any reasonable 4 track recorder will enable you to record two tracks, then play them back whilst recording a further stereo pair, with a headphone out to monitor both. A more sophisticated model with a decent mixing section will enable the mix in the headphones to be set up at whatever levels and mix the performer requires.

Perhaps a chat to find why the musician doesn't like headphones and a reassuring explanation of the advantages might solve your problem.

Roger

Gregg, what is the reason the artist does not want to use some form of isolated listening? If it is that they won't be able to hear themselves playing, I think that is has already been addressed that they will be able to hear themselves play along with the first recorded track.

From working with actors and musicians I know that everyone of them has their own particular desires and way of performing. Just curious about this one.I second Garret's question. Since listening on headphones while playing their own parts is a very common practice - one might even say the normal practice - for professional musicians doing multitrack recording in the studio, it seems very odd that this performer would refuse to do it.

This is a very valid question and having been audio engineering for more than 30 years, I have come across many musicians who were very unhappy with the idea of working with headphones. This is usually due to a lack of experience of working that way, or not using high quality equipment and competent engineers.

If their unwillingness is due to a purist stance, then I would argue that recording a piano duet without a second pianist is moving well away from a purist recording.

My own experience is that working for a short time with a properly mixed sound and good quality studio headphones, will quickly ease their fears. This will be especially true if they feel that they will not be able to hear their live piano properly. Again drawing on my own experience, I have found that many musicians with the no headphone view, frequently quickly start to prefer it as it enables them to totally focus on the music....

RogerIn that vein, this morning I just happened to be watching a video of a recording session with Yo Yo Ma and Chris Botti ... virtualy all the musicians in the ensemble were wearing phones. Botti was even in a sound booth - no phones would have meant he would have been unable to hear the other musicians in the group at all.

Garrett, the artist isn't willing to use earphone/earbud playback because she is not comfortable trying that. This is someone who was university educated as a classical pianist, who is past 70 years old. She is used to playing in a strictly non-electronic setting, listening with open ears to the performance, and achieving balance between herself and the other pianist (when playing duets) with open ears. She is not willing to try anything that blocks or covers her ears. In fact, she is not accustomed to recording at all. I imagine that she has never worn headphones in her life. The idea makes her uncomfortable and I will not try to get her to change her mind, even if it makes my job a little more difficult.

I respect that position. I don't feel it's my job to re-train someone who has been playing classical music for over 50 years. It's my job to get the best possible archival recording of what the performer is willing to do... period.

I don't think this is necessarily a "purist stance," it's a matter of comfort. I believe that once a performer is outside his or her "comfort zone," the performance will suffer. I remember once recording a vocal performance at a nursing home. There were multiple sonalert-type beepers going on and off all over the room, throughout the concert, as people had problems with their oxygen tanks, heart monitors, etc. It was a real nightmare, and obviously the singers had great difficulty keeping the performance together. The potential situation with my pianist is not nearly that distracting, of course, but it's still a matter of concentration and comfort.

Just the idea of playing against a recorded track is enough of a challenge: all the visual cues that two pianists normally exchange during duet playing will be non-existent. Classical piano isn't played to a metronome or a click track... there are subtle changes of tempo and changes of expression going on throughout every composition, which are communicated between performers by visual cues, head nods, and other subtle body language. All of that will be missing. So trying to match the "second piano" part to a pre-recorded "first piano" part, without any of that non-audible communication, will already be a big challenge. I am absolutely unwilling to add to that difficulty by imposing headphones or earbuds on the artist.

Imagine, for example, if you'd been driving for 50 years, the way we all do. Then suddenly someone painted all the windows in you car solid black, and gave you a few video monitors for navigation. You might be willing to try driving that way, and you might not crash. But I'll bet your driving would not flow nearly as smoothly as if you were driving with clear windows. In time, you might even learn to drive comfortably and well with video monitors. But the first few trips would be pretty stressful and unpleasant. You would not want your driving "performance" to be preserved for posterity as an example of your best driving. I see that as being very analagous to what this pianist would face wearing earphones or earbuds.

Now, having said all the above for the sake of enlightening everyone as to the psychology of the situation, please let me save a lot of unnecessary typing. I reiterate that I am not going to try to "re-train" or "re-condition" this performer. I have been asked to consider this project with loudspeaker playback, and that's what I'm going to do. I asked a technical question here; I understand the acoustical difficulties; I appreciate the technical answers. But I am not looking for an amateur psychological approach. So honestly, folks, any further discussion about "why" will not benefit me, will not move the project forward, and will probably not receive any further response from me.

Regards to all.

Sorry Garrett - but the pianist I'm recording cannot play properly at the standard required without hearing the instrument. No doubt if he tried and got used to it, he probably could - but musicians of their capability have very acute hearing. Blocking their ears is like doing a visual task with one eye closed.

We are talking about people who will have the piano tuned to Bach's original temperament because it doesn't sound right on modern tuning. Slapping a big pair of headphones on these people just doesn't work.

Hence my small speakers on stands approach. For classical piano, it's more common for a more distant recording setup. I use a stereo microphone with cardioid or fig-8 patterns and the top capsule spins through 90 degrees to set the width. If you need to overdub, then close mics give more isolation.

Now, having said all the above for the sake of enlightening everyone as to the psychology of the situation, please let me save a lot of unnecessary typing. I reiterate that I am not going to try to "re-train" or "re-condition" this performer. I have been asked to consider this project with loudspeaker playback, and that's what I'm going to do. I asked a technical question here; I understand the acoustical difficulties; I appreciate the technical answers. But I am not looking for an amateur psychological approach. So honestly, folks, any further discussion about "why" will not benefit me, will not move the project forward, and will probably not receive any further response from me.

Greg, I cannot speak for anyone else but you have completely misunderstood the root of my question. You say you've asked for technical answers. you received several. But, your statement about "amateur psychological approach" indicates to me that you have ignored a very important aspect of working with artists. Understanding the reasons for ones resistance to a given solution is one of the steps to finding an acceptable solution and is part of your responsibility.

Also, I understand that you don't have any background on many of the other people on this forum so you couldn't know where I'm coming from, I have a fair amount of background in music. Mostly classical so I have a bit more than just a tad bit of understanding of the mentality of classical musicians. I have a good understanding and appreciation for what it takes to perform at an elite level. I also have a fair amount of personal experience working with artists who have very particular demands, but more importantly I have had the rare opportunity to witness what very successful producers do to handle these artists. So, my question was not asked to try to give an "amateur psychological approach." I asked because understanding the artists true reasons for not wanting to do something may help to come up with an acceptable approach.


I respect that position. I don't feel it's my job to re-train someone who has been playing classical music for over 50 years. It's my job to get the best possible archival recording of what the performer is willing to do... period.

You are correct Greg, your job isn't to try to retrain them to play the piano. I don't think anyone is asking you to do that. But, if you are going to charge someone money, and claim that you are a professional recording engineer, you do have the responsibility to explore every avenue to solve an issue that will make the recording less than what it could be. That is your responsibility. Finding the right balance of compromises is a difficult thing to do. But, if you have skills in asking the right questions in the right context, you may discover there are more options available. The only thing that you cannot do is fight physics. That is a battle you will never win.

We are talking about people who will have the piano tuned to Bach's original temperament because it doesn't sound right on modern tuning. Slapping a big pair of headphones on these people just doesn't work.

Not every classical musician has this aversion to using headphones when recording. I've worked with artists at the highest level and some feel this way and others don't. It really depends on the individual.

And, take solace that musicians aren't the only ones with demands that are hard to overcome, work with actors and directors. As a cinematographer you're often asked to pull a miracle out of your butt. And to do it in 5 minutes.

I have worked with musicians and vocalists of all types in the studio over many many years as an engineer and I have also been a guitarist and vocalist for over 40 years. One thing I can tell you with absolute assurance is that it is more difficult to play a duet with yourself than with someone else! I"ve never quite worked out why that is, but I think that it is for the reasons that have been mentioned before. As a musician, you are sensitive to every variation in the feel of the music played by your musical partner and you fit around each other with every subtle nuance. So I can understand why the lady pianist feels the way she does.

However, when you play a piece of music on your own, the subtleties and variations in expression are instinctive and not neccessarily thought out in advance. When you attempt to play along or sing with a recording of yourself, you immediately start listening to what you played before and whether consciously or subconsciously you attempt to replicate what you did previously. This is quite difficult to do, sometimes even for experienced session musicians to get perfect repetition or harmony. Frequently in the studio with inexperienced musicians, it was easiest to let them perform it twice without hearing the original, particularly with vocalists. It was quite amazing how often the matches would be perfect as they were using the same inner influences without trying to follow.

The big problem for the OP though, is that there is no rhythm or click/syncopation to keep the time scale identical, so I can see this being a bigger problem than just sound overspill.

The lady concerned may well be a brilliant concert pianist with nobody suggesting that she needs to be told how how to play the piano. It is though worth remembering that she may have played all her career without headphones, but I bet she has also never played a duet with herself either! That will be a new skill that she will have to adapt to and working with headphones may be another.

To use a poor analogy, you may well have spoken English all your life but if you go to China, don't expect them to understand you :-)

Roger

You are correct Greg, your job isn't to try to retrain them to play the piano. I don't think anyone is asking you to do that.
Ah, but you are!

Playing the piano is more than just depressing the keys. It is depressing the keys with very subtle nuances, to get the exact sound that the pianist wants to achieve. With duet playing, that involves listening to the balance between one's own piano and the other performer's piano (or, in some cases, it may be listening to how the other performer plays the same [shared] piano).

The pianist's listening is in many ways as important as the depressing of the keys.

So if I were to try to convince the artist to listen with headphones, for the first time in her 70+ years, then I would, indeed, be retraining her how to "play the piano." And if I were to say, "Don't worry about the balance, we'll adjust that in post," that would be an insult to all of the artist's musical training and ability.

I was not asked to produce the best possible technical recording, no holds barred. I was asked if I could produce a recording of this particular [headphone adverse] artist, playing a duet against a loudspeaker playback. That's the job: take it or leave it. I took it.

I respect this particular artist's refusal to learn how to play confidently while wearing headphones. I realize that the recording quality may not be quite as good theoretically as might be possible if we used headphones; but that's entirely moot, because that's not going to happen. Maybe you wouldn't take the job as defined, and that's fine with me. But, having accepted that challenge, I am not then going to try to change the rules after agreeing to do it with the condition that it will be loudspeaker playback.

I respect the fact that many of you have more experience than I have; that's why I posted the question here. Some of you have explained the technical reasons why this approach will be more difficult, and the results perhaps less perfect, than if we were to use headphone playback; I understand all those reasons and did understand most of them before I posted my question.

It's no surprise to hear that many musicians wear headphones while recording, and I don't doubt that some classical musicians do, too... but in fact the musician I'm working with is simply not willing to do that. I've accepted the job on those terms. I am unwilling to alienate this client by telling her that she is wrong. And I am unwilling to undermine her confidence in me by telling her I can not record her unless she wears headphones (if that's the case, I shouldn't have accepted the project in the first place). So, as I've tried to explain, this pseudo-psychological approach {e.g. "why does the artist feel that way?", "ask the right questions," "present it in a certain way," etc. might be valid for you with a different artist in a different situation, but it is simply not applicable to my particular situation with this particular artist.

if you are going to charge someone money, and claim that you are a professional recording engineer, you do have the responsibility to explore every avenue to solve an issue that will make the recording less than what it could be.

If I insist on the artist wearing headphones, and she is uncomfortable, and her playing is not up to per, then that will make the recording less than what it could be. You seem to think that a perfectly recorded sub-standard performance is OK. I beg to differ. I think the performance is the most important thing, and that means the artist has to be comfortable with the entire process. And that was all agreed on when I signed on to the project. And in fact, if I were to insist on headphones, they'd simply cancel the project, which is certainly their right. Period.

.....If I insist on the artist wearing headphones, and she is uncomfortable, and her playing is not up to per, then that will make the recording less than what it could be. You seem to think that a perfectly recorded sub-standard performance is OK. I beg to differ. I think the performance is the most important thing, and that means the artist has to be comfortable with the entire process. And that was all agreed on when I signed on to the project. And in fact, if I were to insist on headphones, they'd simply cancel the project, which is certainly their right. Period.It seems like you're stuck between a rock and a hard place. What is more likely to screw up the overall project, a good recording of a less than perfect performance or a poor recording of a good performance? I'd be hard pressed to choose between the two evils. A less than perfect performance from the artist is unacceptable but likewise, a less than perfect recording of her performance is also unacceptable. How do you choose?

Steve,

I think we've finally gotten to the crux of the matter. But in fact, the two choices are:
• a less than perfect recording of her performance, or
• a perfect recording of no performance (i.e. no recording at all).

I've reconciled myself to those two options, and I honestly think the level of imperfection of the recording will be acceptable to everyone concerned.

After all, people still listen to recordings of Rachmaninoff; people still listen to recordings of Caruso; apparently the value of the performance overrides the poor quality of the recordings. We could even name a particular well-known label whose classical recordings through the '60s and '70s were unacceptably shrill to a lot of people... but Bernstein / NY Phil recordings sold a lot of copies.

C'mon... a lot of the Q/A threads on this forum are about how to make the best of an imperfect situation. e.g., How to remove noise from an imperfect recording (rather than the "perfect" alternative: set up and record again). A lot of experts offer advice and opinions on how to reduce the amount of imperfection to an acceptable level.

That's all I'm trying to do: reduce the level of imperfection in this particular recording. I'm simply trying to do it in advance, rather than after the fact.

Regards.

Greg, I think that you need to understand what I am trying to communicate. Maybe I am not being clear. NO (yes a loud yelling no), I am not trying to tell you to retrain the pianist how to play. Where did you see that? You are reading what you want to read instead of reading the words. Did you just ignore the part where I wrote about finding the balance of compromises? Where did I say you should insist that the pianist wear headphones?

The point I am trying to make is that the more information one has, the better the decisions on these compromises will be. That is why I was asking the question.

And please stop being condescending when it comes to musical performance. You seem to think that you are the only one who understands how to play music. I've been a musician for over 40 years and have studied music at a university so believe me when I tell you that I completely understand the requirements of performing. I know that playing a piano is more than pressing the keys. I also know that playing music is more than just making particular sounds. It requires an understanding of the composers intent. It requires studying the subtext of each and every passage. You have to understand how the situation the composer was experiencing when they wrote that particular piece and how the performers experiences affect the interpretation of that subtext? It requires that the artist understands the mental state that Berlioz was in when he wrote Symphony Fantastique if that is what you are performing.

Garrett,

Please understand that I am not replying only to you. I do not have the time or the desire to write an individual, detailed reply to every single post in this thread. I am trying to reply to the general direction this thread has taken, to wit a questioning of the performer's decision about headphones, rather than a response to the technical question that I originally posted.

If I seem condescending, perhaps it's because I have felt the need to explain myself several times, since many of the replies have ignored my simple statement that the performer refuses to wear headphones and I refuse to challenge that decision. Rather than accepting that as a given, and addressing the technical issues (or simply not replying at all), many folks seem to feel they can convince me to convince the pianist to use headphones.

However, I stick by my assertion that convincing a pianist, who has never previously worn headphones, to re-learn how to perform while wearing headphones, is, essentially, asking her to re-learn playing the instrument. That's because hearing is a large part of playing. While the pianist will "hear herself play" through the headphones, it won't be the same as hearing herself live without using any headphones. Obviously, the headphones can't be 100% transparent to the live sound of her piano, so while she will "hear" the piano, it will sound different. (Or, if her mics are mixed into the headphones, it still won't sound "natural" to her... and then her expression becomes dependant on the monitor mix, which is another unnatural situation.)

More to the point, she doesn't feel comfortable about even trying it. That really ends my options, so it's rather frustrating to have people try to convince me that I should change her mind.

Some folks have not seemed to "get it" the first time around, so I've tried to make my explanations more clear and unambiguous each time. Perhaps that seems condescending to someone who has a good understanding of classical music (as you seem to have). Again, I'm sorry, but I'm trying to make my point with multiple people at once, so I can't tailor an individual response to each person.

Really, the best solution to your taking offense, and to my frustration, is to drop this thread altogether, since there has been little or no discussion of the original technical question for quite a while now. Perhaps someone else would like to start a new thread about "performer psychology" but since this thread is no longer discussing "Lip-sync equipment" I think it's gone far off topic and the time has come for it to end.

I think I have a solution! I've seen grand pianos that play by themselves. A built in recorder captures a performance with all the dynamics that a pianist inputs, then plays back by striking the keys with the same velocity. Have you seen such a piano? I've seen these played by performers at Macy's and Nordstrom's. If you can rent one of these for your recording session, all of your problems are solved!
Grand piano player systems, cd player units for baby grand pianos. (http://grandpianoshowcase.com/grand-piano-baby-grand-piano-player-pianos.html)

Greg, I understand your frustration and I apologies if there was some misunderstanding of your specific question.

That's all I'm trying to do: reduce the level of imperfection in this particular recording. I'm simply trying to do it in advance, rather than after the fact.

I do not think you would want to try to do anything beyond careful placement of mics and replay through the loudspeakers at the lowest volume possible. I would not try to use anything to cancel the recorded second performance until I were in post. If you can do it successfully live you could do it in post. If did try and it wasn't successful, at least if you did it in post you'd have the unaltered recording to fall back on.

That would be my approach. So for this situation your compromise will be your time in post. If that isn't acceptable then you have another compromise to deal with.

I'd be interested to hear what others think on this approach.

I do not think you would want to try to do anything beyond careful placement of mics and replay through the loudspeakers at the lowest volume possible. I would not try to use anything to cancel the recorded second performance until I were in post.

Garrett,
That is exactly what I've concluded after considering the technical comments posted here. I stated that this would be my direction, back in my post #13.

Although I initially thought about cancellation, I realize that the complexity of multiple reflections plus stereo mics will make that almost impossible. And, at any event, I would try to do any manipulation in post, so the raw track would simply be recorded as cleanly as possible. Even so, playback and recording will need to be done simultaneously by one piece of hardware, in order to maintain "zero sample error" between the two piano parts... so the original question about specific hardware still applies.

[OT: Garrett, not to disparage Symphonie Fantastique, but what about Brahms' first symphony... it took him roughly 16 years to write that. It would be quite a challenge to understand the evolution of Brahms' mental state while he was writing that!]

Warren,
That's a very interesting suggestion. I've never seen such a piano in person, although I've read about them going back for several years. I wonder how accurately they really reproduce all the fine nuances of expression. In my given situation, there are two applicable questions:
• Can a person play the "second part" on the piano, while it is mechanically reproducing the "first part"?
• Can we obtain and manage two such pianos, for the pieces which are two-piano duets?

Regards to all.

From what I heard when I listened to these "recorded" performances, I was impressed with the dynamic variations of these player pianos, it's supposed to put out exactly what you put into it. I guess the only way to judge this is to have your pianist friend record and playback, then have her judge it for herself.


• Can a person play the "second part" on the piano, while it is mechanically reproducing the "first part"?
• Can we obtain and manage two such pianos, for the pieces which are two-piano duets?

Regards to all.

In regards to your first question, yes, as long as the same keys are not being played at the same time.
In regards to the second question, you'll need only 1 player piano, and 1 regular piano. She'll record her performance on the player piano, then play along with it on the second piano.

In regards to the second question, you'll need only 1 player piano, and 1 regular piano. She'll record her performance on the player piano, then play along with it on the second piano.

Well, yes and no. If you were playing a 2-piano 4-hand duet, ideally you'd use two identical pianos. So the second piano would need to be identical to the "player piano" (except that it would not need the reproducing mechanism).

If you would record two artist playing piano, there would not be so much question.
So just consider you are recording 2 artist playing piano.
Just use high quality loudspeaker that reproduce as much as possible the first player and record it as if the sound would come from a real piano while you are also recording the 2nd player.
if in the final recording, the first piano doe not sound too good, you can superimpose the first recoding to add more presence.

Here's a link to Yamaha's player piano. Excerpt from it:
"As with other MIDI instruments, one potential benefit of the readily-edited MIDI data output by a Disklavier is in the professional recording domain, where a recorded performance could be edited, allowing the correction of minor errors after a take."
Disklavier - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disklavier)

Just place a small speaker on a boom arm as close out of frame as you would with a shotgun mic.

You've driven home the point about the talent not wearing ear buds are headphones.

Anything short of the above at this point seems you're not asking for a solution but asking for sympathy.

Anything short of the above at this point seems you're not asking for a solution but asking for sympathy
Six days ago I suggested dropping the thread, and I haven't posted anything for the past five days, so obviously I am not asking for anything at this point. Unfortunately you've chosen to revive the thread.