And that's why I always be sceptic regarding digital keyboard recordings. There are some Chopin Etude recordings here, done on a digital keyboard. I doubt that they are all done without raising the speed artificial, to be honest. I doubt that if someone can play a Chopin etude at concert speed and worked months or years on that, that he/she would record on a digital keyboard. So if I listen to such a piece posted here in the recording section, played in the same fast speed as Pollini plays, without errors, but on a digital keyboard, I get iffy.
It is sooooo easy on a digital keyboard to raise the speed - that is, recording as midi file, playing back with another speed. And edit some wrong notes with some mouse clicks in the midi file. That is INAUDIBLE and EASY, no transformation losses and quality issues like on audio wave file speed conversations.
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.
That comes to the old discussion what we had here already, whether to label a recording as done on a digital keyboard or not. I would prefer to have this label. The one who like to have clean record quality and perfect tuned recordings, can choose digital keyboard recordings. The other might prefer real piano recordings.
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 .