About reduced dynamics - we've been through that before. It definitely comes out flatter than it goes in, strange as it may be. I think these are just not the most sensitive of microphones.
Since there seem to be different opinions about the dynamic behaviour of the Edirol, we certainly still are not "though that". So, you think it comes out flatter than it goes in? How did you proof that?
Maybe one could proof that via direct comparision of a simultanous recording with Edirol and another recording tool and check the result via CoolEdit. To use the ears is doubtful since our awareness is different when we play the piano as when we listen to a recording. This awareness difference has the reason that we are not completely objective, during playing we are busy with playing and we are not truely 100% free for total listening, and next, the acoustics is drastically different if we play behind a notestand on the keyboard or listen at another place the Edirol or other recording tool is located.
Next, even if it would have been objective proofed that the Edirol flattens the dynamic (I doubt that it does noteworthy if the recording level is set to a fixed value), this would mean that the dynamic difference between loudest and softest part is reduced. This is technical speaking a dynamic compression. This however would not lead to your occasionally voiced assumption that the Edirol also swallows soft played notes and makes them unaudible. With a supposed dynamic flattening just the opposit would happen. Since the Edirol cannot perform a dynamic flattening and a dynamic expansion at the same time, something seems strange in your theory.
Say what? I personally have no problems in blaming myself completely for lack of expression, no need to accuse the recording equipment, nor piano, nor full moon or whatever. It is more or less solely me who is responsive.
Let's better be glad to have the possibility to listen to own recordings, something what pianists in the 19th century and earlier did not have. A recording tool is like a mirror, and we come closer to the truth if we carefully analyze the result we get in order to improve, instead feed the illusion that other things beside us are responsible in the first rank for the recorded result.
I just listen to an old Cortot recording. Even the poor recording equipment from 1935 can't rob the beauty from his playing, especially from his expression. Please don't say that the Edirol is worse than that.
Sorry for coming off topic, but i needed to drop a statement on that.