It didn't bother me particularly but the Ravel was noticeably quieter than other pieces I listened to from another thread on this site. The de Falla pieces were fine (and I know I mistakenly typed "these recordings" in my reply, please ignore that). It didn't sound "wrong" or anything but I personally always amplify my (admittedly rare) recordings to minus a few dB unless they are really quiet pieces. With the digital recorders everyone uses now being so quiet, amplifying in post isn't going to cause a great deal of additional noise.

For example, the Ravel peaked at -10dB and although it is a quieter piece I think it could have done with being brought up a little. For each 6dB a track is amplified by, the perceived loudness doubles. These add up, so 12dB will make it four times louder and so on. Judgement is needed as a really quiet piece brought all the way up to zero dB would probably just sound wrong.

But to repeat, in its present form it isn't problematic and I enjoyed it a lot. In fact I'm listening to it again and now I look at the score I note that it varies between p and pp throughout, so feel free to ignore me!

NB if you're using Audacity, there's a difference between "Amplify" and "Normalise". However for solo piano, where both channels are usually recorded at the same level, this difference is less important than it might be otherwise.

Oh thank you! I didn't know about 6dB doubling the loudness. That's great information I'll put in my "how to get good sound" learning file. I am not using Audacity anymore - but even so, would there ever be a reason to use the Normalize function on our piano recordings?

You're welcome! In fact "normalise" in Audacity does actually amplify the recording, but amplifies both the left and right channels by whatever is required to get them each to -3dB exactly. This can means that a different amplification factor is applied to both Left and Right channels. In contrast, the "amplify" function applies a single amplification to both channels.

In short, if one of your L and R channels is louder than the other, then they will both sound the same after "normalisation". This isn't much of a problem to us with our digital recorders pointing directly at the piano, but is a problem if e.g. you have a number of instruments in an ensemble and there is a delicate balance between them that needs to be preserved.

So yes one might want to normalise a piano recording, but I always use "Amplify" myself.

Ah all this takes me back. Must almost be time for me to record something else soon..

Thanks again for explaining the Normalizing thing. In my case, I have tried fooling around with it, as well as amplification and usually end up with quite a mess, so I just don't even go there. All I need is good reverb and some restoration.

That's the spirit! We'll be waiting.....

Monica, I listened to the Serenata a long time ago and then found no time to make a comment on it. I'd like to say I really love your playing which is very sensitive, natural, fresh and lovely at the same time. A better performance of it would be not imaginable. I ask you with Felipe: What happened to you??

This piece so reminds me of the Pavanne!

Hello Monica,
Thank you for letting us discovering this rare small piece by Ravel ! Although it is young Ravel, yet we can recognise his unique style. Since you were asking for an idea regarding other Ravel's piece (not too difficult), my advice is to look at the Forlane from the suite called Le Tombeau de Couperin (http://imslp.org/images/e/ed/PMLP04975- ... eissue.pdf). Maybe you remember my passion for Couperin, and this passion extends to those who composed in his honor. And the Forlane is just exquisite... Looking forward to hearing your rendition !
Regards,

Thanks, Hye-Jin (hope you got my email....)

And hello to you, Francois. I'm always interested in what other members like, so I'm printing off this particular piece Forlane right now as I am typing. Can't wait to try it out. May be a while before I have it in my fingers, though, so you probably should not hold your breath. Thanks again

Francois, I don't know if you will see this message, but I just wanted to tell you that I played through the piece a moment ago and was thrilled to discover that I like it a lot. It has gorgeous and also different/quirky harmonies that I think are very neat! I had to play through it slowly and there are a thousand accidentals of which I probably missed a few, but I still got a sense of the piece and know I will enjoy learning it all the way. Thanks again for the suggestion - it's like candy to me!

Hi Monica,
I'm so pleased to know you like the Forlane Among the whole suite, it is my preferred one. Well, yesterday I've just made a come back to Debussy with l'Isle Joyeuse that I probably will submit within some weeks or months, but after it would be nice to make a tour in Ravel's world.
Have a Merry Christmas with the French impressionists !
Kind regards,

l'Isle Joyeuse is a great piece too. Pretty hard, though, but I love the title! Good luck with it and I look forward to visiting your island! Also, I was thinking just two days ago about Debussy and how I like a lot of his music, but have not played that much except for the usual ones likes La fille aux cheveux de lin, Claire de Lune, and a few others. Maybe after my little romp with Ravel, I will tour in Debussy's world.

Merry Christmas!

I too am re-preparing the L'Isle Joyeuse, having performed it many times in the distant past. What I want to say is that though the title translates as "the Joyful Isle" the music translates as "the Isle of Joy" read: "pleasure." Good luck to Francois and Monica both! Et Jouyeux Noël!

Yes, "The Island of Pleasure" - that's why I said what I said ....(ehh, now I'll probably get coal in my stocking tonight ).


Fröhliche Weihnachten!
(I'm half German)