I could almost swear that the keyboard really got heavier in such days...   Incredible how our minds trick us.

Maybe a slider adjust for our brains would be a god idea...    ;-)

Right, but it also works the other way - if the pianist feels 'good' or 'in control' using a particular technique, they will play better - so in that sense the overall performance can sound better because it actually is (regardless of whether a note in isolation would sound different).

I absolutely agree because I have noticed this myself.  There are times when my DP sounded just wonderful and it was inspiring, whereas at other times it sounded ordinary at best and I wasn't inspired.

The sound of the piano never changed one bit, but my perception of the sound did, and when it sounded better, I was more inspired and played better.  And of course, I was able to coax more nuances out of it.

That's why I say pianists aren't being dishonest when they claim to hear differences.

For all the intelligence of the human brain, it can be fooled quite easily.

Glenn

People belived they could get a half bit comand if move the joystick specially.

I don't think that these pianists are being dishonest - they truly believe they have control over the tone by varying the strike method.

Emotions are a powerful influence on our perception.

Right, but it also works the other way - if the pianist feels 'good' or 'in control' using a particular technique, they will play better - so in that sense the overall performance can sound better because it actually is (regardless of whether a note in isolation would sound different).

BTW although I have no experience of this issue as I'm not classically trained, it reminded me of the first games console, the black & white 'Pong' game:

If you don't remember it, it was a simple kind of table tennis, with a white square ball bouncing around that the players had to deflect with their 'paddles' (vertical white bars that they could move up or down).

Players frequently convinced themselves (myself included) that they could apply 'spin' to the ball by moving their paddles during ball contact - but the software didn't take that into account at all.

True, but what would be the point of emulating this kind of noise?

I agree completely, Glenn. Besides, these noises are probably inaudible from an audience perspective anyway. So no need to include them in any model, they won't be missed

If Pianoteq would emulate this extra "brand" of noise, would require a special controller, able to differentiate those different touchs with same velocity.

True, but what would be the point of emulating this kind of noise?

What's next - emulating the sound of someone in the audience coughing or sneezing?

The truth is, if piano builders could have gotten rid of the damper and key noise from acoustic pianos, they would have.

But unfortunately, the "perfect piano" is a mechanical contraption with thousands of pieces that emit squeaks, rattles, thumps, and clacking noises.  And this is without the sound of the pianists fingers hitting the keys.

Glenn

I would guess that finger-key noise really depends on the physiology of the player's fingers.  Some people undoubtedly have more padding on the fingertips that would make the impact less audible.  I myself have rather bony fingers, so on a good staccato or fast run, the sound of fingers hitting the keys is probably mixed into the overall sound, but I rarely notice it.  What I mostly notice is sore fingertips after playing lots of Rachmaninoff, etc.

It probably also depends on the weight of the action.  A light action is more likely to give way more at the moment of impact, making the impact less audible.

On the other hand, is the noise of a finger hitting a key considered to be an important part of piano sounds?

Since only "some" professional pianists could tell the difference, this might suggest that the finger noise is not an important characteristic of piano music.

I have never been able to detect this noise when playing, and usually I don't even notice the sound of the key hitting the key bed on an acoustic piano.  On my digital with the sound turned off I can hear the keys hitting the key bed, but I still don't notice the sound of my finger hitting the keys.

Can anyone else detect the noise of the finger touching the keys?

Glenn

Glenn

So if someone wanted to add this extra "dimension" to their performance, why not put a physical microphone pointing on your hands to record the finger noise, and mix it with the Pianoteq sound? Electric guitarists are doing the same thing - their main sound is coming from a miked amp or an amp simulator - but they sometimes add an extra microphone just above the strings, to have some extra attack and pick noise to mix to taste.

I don't understand... 

WHat's the difference about acceleration to the strike effect, if the important thing is the final veloccity when the hammer strike the strings?

As far as I'm concerned - nothing.

But the second reference was comparing hitting a key with the finger and driving the hammer onto the strings compared to starting with the finger on the key and pushing down to achieve the same hammer velocity.

In the first case, there is a slight noise of the finger hitting the surface of the key.   It must be very small, but it is a noise, and although not very musical (wink, wink), it is a noise that some highly attuned pianists can hear.  So when these pianists did a listening test, they could hear the finger strike the key, and thus know the key wasn't "stroked".

What we might gather from this is - although some pianists can tell the difference between the sounds generated, the noise of the finger hitting doesn't really make the resulting sound softer.

In reply to Chris's last post, there are times when I play the piano, that it sounds much better, I play better, and I am more creative in my arrangements.  At least that's the mood I'm in, so I really believe that I'm better.

However, last night I was listening to some stuff I recorded six years ago that I should have discarded.  But I was now listening to the midi file being played by Pianoteq, rather than my first Roland.

Guess what? - those recordings I nearly tossed sounded wonderful to me.

We are all affected by things in our head, and we hear things because we feel them.

I don't think that these pianists are being dishonest - they truly believe they have control over the tone by varying the strike method.

Emotions are a powerful influence on our perception.

Glenn

WHat's the difference about acceleration to the strike effect, if the important thing is the final veloccity when the hammer strike the strings?

I scanned the third reference, and they concluded that note G5 had some discernible differences - which doesn't surprise me when I think about it.

The upper treble sounds on an acoustic grand are weaker and extraneous noises become more apparent.   I'm referring to the noise of the key hitting the key bed.  I have a friend (mentioned on this site previously) that is an excellent pianist, and who operates a business restoring pianos.  We often talk of these things - how sound is produced, propagated, and heard.  Incidentally, he doesn't believe in the concept either.

On several occasions he has had a grand piano with the strings removed, and we have "played" the keys.  The sound of the key hitting the key bed is quite loud, but it is constant throughout the full range.  And I might add, resonates into the soundboard.

However, in the upper treble with smaller, shorter strings, where the sound is less robust, this key bed noise is a greater part of the overall sound than it is in the lower notes.

Add in the noise of the finger contacting the key surface (which doesn't occur when the key is stroked or with the finger starting on the key), and it seems that there should be a discernible difference between high and low notes.

An interesting finding/statement in the Conclusion of this third report is, ". . . however, it is in a much lesser degree than most pianists expect".

I could concede that there is a slight difference, but isn't the most important question:  "Is is the difference significant"?  If it's not significant, then why do we keep fooling ourselves?

This belief is extremely hard to dispel because pianists have believed it and practiced it for centuries - and the belief is still being taught at otherwise credible music schools.

The third study was done in collaboration with a pianist that believes in the concept - if I had conducted the tests, I would be hard pressed to write a conclusion that refuted what my collaborator believed.

Glenn

I agree, off-hand it is hard to see how tone can be varied due to the lack of control over the hammer once it starts moving. I also agree with your comments about the marketing language used by some musical equipment manufacturers - I shake my head sometimes as I read it.

The last study concludes that differences in tone are possible, but are minute and less than what people may expect. Perhaps tone is mostly perceived due to the player's expression which would affect controllable parameters such as legato, phrasing, dynamics, etc.

Chris

Thanks for finding and posting the research papers.

A little background of me - my mother was a certified/registered piano teacher, and she taught me that how the key was played - either struck or stroked - would change the tone.  It was believed and still is by most classically trained pianists, and is dogma in music schools.

I believed it for many years, but eventually my physics, math, and engineering caught up, and I started to realize that musicians were imagining the differences - most notably the ones that used the techniques of striking and stroking.  (I never told my mother).

I have read the second paper through; scanned the first one, but felt that the first one (published in 1925) wouldn't have had nearly sophisticated enough equipment (waveform analysis) to be able to conclude anything significant (besides it's way too long and rambles on and on).  I haven't read the third but will.

In the Conclusion to the first paper by Goebl/Bresin/Galembo, I found the following very interesting and I believe, very significant.

"Our results suggest that only some musicians are able to distinguish between a struck note and a pressed touch using the touch noises as cue, especially the finger-key noise that characterizes a struck attack.   Without those touch noises (finger hitting the key) none of them could tell any difference anymore."

So it would seem that SOME were able to tell the difference only because they could hear the sound of the finger hitting the key in struck key sound.   When the finger started on the key (pressed touch), there is no noise of the finger hitting the key.

When this aspect is removed, none of the test subjects could tell the difference.

They are being kind and gentle when they say, "In the light of the present results, we consider the pure aural affect of touch noises (excluding visual and other cues) a rather small one."

Once the hammer starts moving towards the strings, the pianist has no control over how it strikes the strings.  I have no argument with timbre or tone changing with hammer velocity - it's quite audible and has been modeled in Pianoteq.  Higher hammer velocities produce harsher tones and vice versa.

Looking forward to some interesting rebuttals.

Glenn