This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment MessageHi Trent, How would you put in context the "margin of error" that might apply to = your theory below? I don't know enough about these technologies to = definitely dispute your theory, but I wonder about some things, mainly = whether the magnitude and frequency distribution of the differences in = recording technology really would have the effects on perceived voicing = that you suggest. =20 As I said in a previous post, the sound in those old recordings sounds = "colored," more times than not, at least to my ears. On a piano, = voicing is the process of balancing the relative amplitudes of the = fundamental and the numerous partials. The same thing can be done = electronically, whether intentionally or not. One thing that I am thinking is that "hardness" in tone can come from = peaks in the 3-5kHz range, and those old microphones and tape recorders = wouldn't necessarily record that range in misleadingly low proportion. I would trust the older recording equipment to be sensitive in this = range, of course. That's not to say that the equalization settings were = flat! Even so, I'm skeptical that the "glassiness" heard in many pianos = comes from sound in as narrow a band as 3-5kHz. I would think it comes = from a very broad distribution of spectral energy in the higher = frequency ranges, going on up to the limits of our frequency = sensitivity. I would be surprised if recordings from the 50's are that deficient = below 10kHz, and my gut sense is that any large differences in voicing = quality will be evident even in recordings truncated at 10kHz. Perhaps, but I don't think this tells you the whole story. If there were some general frequency balance pattern present, like a = tendency towards a hump in response around 250Hz or something, I could = see how you could get an impression of a mellower, deeper tone. But I = have never heard of anything like that being the rule, but maybe = something like that was common. I've heard a number of recordings that sounded as though they were made = inside an oil drum. <grin> However, I'd characterize that as the = exception, rather than the rule. I do suspect it was common not to = strive for utterly flat response and to adjust for what sounded the = best. I'm also curious about where you mention large tape heads, because my = layman's understanding has been that the width of the gap and the tape = speed governed range more than anything, and also that some of those old = Ampex machines and the like were, and are, very very good. It's not just the gap. It's also the inductive properties of the tape = head. A component with high inductance can't be driven well at high = frequencies. I *think* the bias frequencies used back then were much = lower, limiting the upper end of the frequency response curve. But this = is where I would need to defer to someone like Horace, who probably = knows more about these machines. =20 It would be interesting to hear from some of those who have noticed = qualities in a variety of recordings from different periods. I would = expect some instruments (trumpets, flutes, triangles, cymbals, human = voices to some degree) to have a very similar spectral balance today as = they did in the 50's. So in these recordings where the piano sounds = less bright or hard, do the other instruments also sound mellower or = muted or muffled? And how about organ recordings with lots of high = frequencies -- mightn't that be noticeable? Excellent point! It would be very useful to use other instruments as a = reference. I don't know which of the instruments you suggested would be = constant throughout the ages. I would suspect trumpets and human voices = change with the styles. Flutes would be relatively constant, but = generally devoid of really high spectral content. Cymbals might work, = as well as triangles. Violins have been very carefully standardized, = and the spectral content of an entire violin section might provide a = useful "average" spectrum with which comparisons can be made.=20 I wonder if there's been a call for brighter and brighter pianos since = the 40's to cut through the mix with a lot of amplified instruments. In = any case, I too am glad to hear that I'm not alone in my general = preference for a wider timbral range and usually a warmer or more mellow = sound and that Barbara has been receiving a lot of appreciation from = musicians for her work. I too ;-) As I've said before, I'm a big fan of the American Golden Age = pianos, and I really hate lacquered hammers. However, the skeptic in me = wonders if the Golden Age pianos sound today anything like they sounded = back then. I don't trust musical recordings enough to look to them for = answers. Peace, Sarah www.graphic-fusion.com ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/57/19/b3/d9/attachment.htm ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC