Yes definitely. I plead guilty

I will certainly not do 3) again, but I'll probably not be able to resist the temptation to cut out a really horrific wart if possible. Luckily these seem to happen less frequently (actually most of my recent recordings are unedited).

I assume that this post is directed to me as no other etude Chopin pianists are active in the forum . I have three recordings up which are 10/1, 10/2 and 10/6. 10/1 and 10/2 are very difficult and some voices were raised a couple of years ago so I made a video recording of me playing it 10/1. I actually made a little joke to the "speed daemon community" and made a video recording of the 2:nd with me wearing a mask .
None of these two are one takes and that is actually audible (especially in the second). I did not either play a couple of takes and then cut the best part together. I deliberately just made a passage until that was finished. Took a break (days apart as you get very tired playing these) and continued with the next etc. That could be named cheating but I do not really care. I know I played both these etudes inside and out and practised them daily in about 2 years before I made the recordings. I preferred to be sure that my recordings sounded well and put music in the first room and the performance in the second.
BUT, I did NOT manipulate the tempo or edit notes (not in any other recordings either) and as one can hear, there are quite a few mistakes there, especially in 10/1. But I have experimented with midi (inspired by Mr. Grant) but was pretty desillusioned as in fact, it is extremly time consuming (it is NOT that easy at all), it often sounds bad and to me counterproductive as I lose the musical inspiration.
Why I use my Yamaha CLP-170 before the Nylund & Son or my Schimmel in most of my recordings? It simply sounds that much better.

So if the question was directed towards me, I guess the above is the answer .

When it comes to the other recordings, I know for certain that Grant's is a midi rendation. All his recordings in the site are. About the other pianists, I don't know.


The discussion started off from that there exist wav-editing audio tools with the possibility to very simple raise the tempo (much more advanced tools than in the example in the Audition Room). That makes the discussion regarding marking recordings made by digital keyboards more or less obsolete.

Also, we have 1041 recordings on the site and have no possibility to know if the recording was made on a digital or acoustic piano, nor do I feel a need to put the power in to implement this as 1) We need to contact all 78 pianists (many of who we no longer have valid contact information to) 2) It is hell of a job which I prefer spend on other technical issues (we are about to move to a more reliable server, but I hope you never even notice the change but from future lack of down times) and in reality, not possible .

For sure, postprocessing and trying to cut out a slip is a hell of a tedious donkeywork, especially on a slow PC like mine. With my latest bunch of recordings I spent far more time on that than on the actual recording. Indeed I would just as soonl avoid that, cut down on the slips best as can and learn to live with the remaining mistakes. Just create a batch job for the amplify and reverb and be done with it.

No point in trying to determine the status of existing recordings, I think so too. What we could do for new submissions is ask the pianist to provide any details they might want to share on their level of editing. Or would that be a bad idea and create a wrong atmosphere ? I guess this will always be a difficult subject (except for amateurs like us who have nothing to lose or gain )

I fully support your idea and it would be compulsory.

For the record, any recordings submitted by me will not be edited in any way. Editing is overrated. It's like getting a bunch of cheat codes to fly through a new video game without daring to take any risks. That's boring, IMO. Mistakes can be exhilarating. I performed Chopin's etudes 10/1, 10/5 and 10/7 last week during recital hour. I went a little crazy with the tempo. The audience had a really strong reaction (positive) in spite of my note errors. A slow, sanitized performance would have been more comfortable, and as plain as unsalted oatmeal.

Pete

Robert, what about Pollini's Etudes? Don't tell me they're edited. My head's gonna explode if I find out the 10/1 is edited. I spent four years making my performance as clear and powerful as his.

say it isn't so

PJF

Well, I am not sure my answer would be the best for your health but lets put it like this.
At the age of 14 (I think he was 14...my memory can be a year wrong or so), Mr. Pollini became famous when he performed the entire cycle of Chopin etudes of op.10 and op.25 in a competition so there exist NOT DOUBT that he could play them. I mean REALLY play them all. I have found no Internet references of that he made a bar-by-bar recording of the Chopin etudes but was told so by Koji Attwood who is one of the founder of Whitekeys.com and previously a member of this site. Koji mostly responds to kind and friendly put emails so please go ahead and ask him what his references are.

Yes, got your point and agree with it. I only use editing to correct a real horrible error (if it is possible, many times it isn't), which I assume you do not make anymore. A tiny slip in the fray of a difficult passage is not worth the trouble and indeed adds to the human experience.

Robert, you know that the question about the bar-by-bar recording rumor by Pollini did arise already here in the forum, also in the same context of cheating. At that time I sent a pmail to Koji Attwood and asked him - kind and friendly - about the background he knows about this Pollini recording. The pmail left the outbox, so Koji must have read it. He never answered!
So for me it remains a rumor that Pollini did a bar-by-bar recording on the Chopin Etudes until it is really proofed. It can be dangerous to spread such rumors, by the way. That takes from professionals are cutted together is one thing, and seems to be in common use. But bar-by-bar recording is a big claim!

Regarding the Chopin Etude discussion on digital keyboards I sent a pmail to you.



His Chopin ballade recording is a midi rendation too???
That MUST be noted, otherwise it is really cheating!!!!

It is a pity we do not have this discussion left as Internetnu.net chopped us off. I am 100% certain that Koji did reply me this in public and that someone else backed him up.

I wrote that I was extremely impressed be Pollini's extreme fast 2 octave jumps in the 10/12 which in timing took about 0.08 seconds or so. Koji replied that you can afford to take chances in the studio when making bar-by-bar recordings and so the discussion was took off.
Just some weeks earlier, I had a discussions with a local piano dealer in Gothenburg who told me the story that Pollini did the etudes recordings without re-takes. Quite the opposite so to speak. This is nothing but rumours and it would be very good if Koji replied you. If he is not sure what he got this from, perhaps I should cut that away from the entire discussion to stop this rumour?


And I have replied you the missing pieces about the Chopin etude puzzle. A bit too confusing matter to be posted in this topic .

Grant first uploaded the WTC I and then wrote a biography and text about his recording was created. Afterwards he gradually uploaded a couple of new pieces and we never changed the biography. I'll send John a note about this.

About Grant's Ballade 3, you may remember Robert, that I wondered whether it was digital too, as it seems to be so totally perfect, I mean Joe-like perfect. If I remember correctly you were quite positive that this was a 'real' recording. And now you suggest that it is a midi too. I would like to know the truth about it - are you going to ask him about that ?

Thank you for that! One can have different opions on Grant's recordings, can call them perfect, but beside how they were produced, all things sound to me kind of cold and sterile, even his Chopin 3rd Ballade recording. Only personal opinion.

Joe-like perfect.

Sorry Chris for my confusing replies. First I thought it was "real" (Joffrey had most of the contact with Grant and it was Jof who sent Grant an encouraging email that we would like to have his recording on the site, John did not himself actively seek to be up here) but remember asking him a bit later in another matter and believe I got the reply that is was a midi rendation as well as all of the uploaded recordings. But now I get a bit confused myself. Can the memory become weak in the age of 35 already?!

I will send him a little email about this unless he reads and replies himself.

i wish you were talking about me...lol[/quote]