For the piano player: studio monitors or Hi-Fi?

Hello Jonas,

You raise a very good question.  I happen to record and do critical listening through my AKG_702 studio 'phones, but regularly burn CD's of my demos and listen to them through my home stereo system (Ohm F's and Ohm Walsh 4's) to check balance and especially to verify reverb levels.  When listening to Pianoteq through headphones, I tend to push the reverb a tad too much; as a result, the recordings sound "too wet" through my home system, unless I compensate by decreasing the amount of reverb in the final product.

I also enjoy playing my CD demos through as many other devices as possible:  car stereo, alarm clock stereo, Bose wave radio, high-end audio salons, etc, to check how the levels, balance and reverb come through when played on these media.  Usually when I have friends over, I play my Pianoteq demoed CDs through the home system.  Incidentally, besides playing Pianoteq (binaural mode) live through my headphones, I derive the most satisfaction when listening to the finished product through my home system.

Hope this helps shed light on the subject.

Cheers,

Joe

I second this opinion: you need a lot of punch (power) to get a decent (realistic) piano sound. Most hifi speakers, except some expensive ones, would give up. You could of course play through them but you probably won't be satisfied while with good studio monitors, you would. You should of course get also decent studio monitors, preferably bi-amplified, and with enough power. Not the cheapest ones.
BTW: listening through headphones, while often very pleasing (even "studio monitors"), is never a good way to judge a mix or to correct a sound, never. As you found out, you'll put too much reverb in your mix for instance. You'll probably also put too much or not enough bass. It's simply too difficult to appreciate all the correct levels with headphones. I talk from experience: actually I'm recording classical music since more than 30 years (!), in many, many different locations and I often have to rely on headphones only. That's always the most difficult part of my job!

I would guess this is due to the fact that headphones by definition sound more dry than speakers. Almost any room produces a certain amount of reverb, especially the listeners' living rooms.

Bass is also a problem when using monitor speakers. When the speakers are placed near the wall (which is often the case), the differing reflection and dissipation behaviours will often produce an increased bass impression in the near-field (i.e., it gets distorted). This is why many monitors have a low-frequency compensation switch, and you still probably need an equaliser.

I guess if at all possible one should either check the mix on several different setups before signing off on it, or do the main work on a well-known setup that one is used to. Preferably both. Of course this is impossible when recording classical music, since you have to bring the recording setup to the location, not the other way round... meaning constantly changing conditions. My hat's off to you, sir.

That's why I have my DT-990. I specifically went hunting for affordable monitor phones that were still as linear as possible.

Sure, the Neumann KH's are impressive but the price too...
There are many cheaper alternatives that also do a (very) good job: Dynaudio, KRK, Adam, Fostex, Genelec, to name just a few.

880 are a bit more linear than 990 though, 990 has a 9 dB bump around 100 Hz region One of the most linear headphones are Denon AH-D2000 (sadly discontinued).

The DT-880 are semi-closed, though, which is why I went with the 990. But I'd say the whole series is pretty good.

I disagree on that one. Active(!) studio monitors are very common and they are designed as tools to assess a mix. For that purpose a premature decision what the listener might or might not hear is counterproductive, which is why studio monitors as a class feature a much 'flatter' frequency response than normal speakers. Also there is such a thing as classical recordings, and people listening to those are much more demanding when it comes to the quality of the recording and mix. The point being: you'll always want monitors that tell you the "truth" about what is in the recording, adding nothing and leaving nothing out. A studio monitor that cannot do this is not a studio monitor at all.

And because of this, active monitors actually are a tool you will find in real-life studios. Of course frequency responce in the lowest range is a problem for every speaker system. Active monitors do have an advantage here, since they feature their very own amplifier that can be tuned specifically to them. If one really wants to boost the lowest frequencies (I find that with 8" speakers and larger there is really not much need, though), many monitors can be complemented with a subwoofer.

This is a statement I don't really get at all. What's your point, exactly? The lowest note on most grands is indeed the sub-contra A at 27.5 Hertz. However, this is in a frequency range where most humans have difficulty hearing notes as notes, since we are very close to the infrasonic range. What most humans actually hear in this range is a low-frequency rumble plus harmonics. Chords don't really sound like chords either.

So I daresay a speaker system which has a decent frequency response down to 40-50 Hertz is good enough, since of course there will not be a hard cut-off below. And the 4kHz for the c''''' are not the full picture either. Again there's a lot of harmonics to be considered; in fact I'd say a piano like many acoustic instruments can even produce ultra-sonics. Which is a very real problem when recording them... but not for playback. For playback, everything that manages decent linearity up to 20kHz is fine, yielding an effective 'interesting' range of 50Hz-20kHz.

Beemer,

I  made a point of active studio monitors because this was what we were talking about in this thread. Your last response again suggests that you think of speakers in terms of keyboard amplifiers and passive speakers. And because I got this impression, I pointed out that active monitors are very common; in fact they are probably the de-facto norm. For example, I used to have a pair of Behringer 2030A, which are 5" monitors that each bring their own amplifier at about 100W. Active monitors and keyboard amplifiers are different things.

An 8" active monitor (which is what I am using now) usually has a peak power of over 250W per speaker (i.e., about 140-150W RMS seems to be typical). Because of this relatively high output and the fact that active monitors feature their own specifically tuned amplifier, I do recommend them whole-heartedly for piano play. Active monitors have little in common with keyboard amplifiers, however, and this does not invalidate anything you said if the thread starter wants to go the route of a separate amplifier and passive speakers; there are a lot of things to consider.

PS: I don't have a 'beef' with you, on the contrary. I actually do think our opinions are not that far apart, after all.

Robert,

Pleased to see that you are using the Zoom R24.  I have a Zoom H4n for portability reason but don't use its usb sound interface capability.

I don't know how technical you are.   I'm an EE so forgive me if the following bores you.  You may have noticed that I have consistently used the term "servo controlled" which is not the same as active speakers.  Here is an article that might (or might not ) interest you:

http://www.danmarx.org/audioinnovation/servosub.html

Ian

kalessin,

I have been thinking about your comment about us only hearing the harmonics (not including the 1st which I understand the Fundamental is called in the USA), from 2nd upward of 27.5Hz.

Thanks for mentioning this.  I decided to check my own hearing using: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8gjsefNYpE

For me at least you are correct.  I cannot hear 27.5Hz at all.   I just "feel" vibration so my hearing A0 note is my hearing the summation of its harmonics.  I can hear the test Sinewave at 32Hz and perceive it as a musical note.

I checked with another site and got the same result.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNf9nzvnd1k

Sadly I also checked using this site for my high frequency hearing and my limit is 13,800Hz.  Maybe not too bad for my 67 years?

Ian

Just to add my experience to this low frequency discussion, you need a very good speaker to just hear the fundamental around 27 Hz...I use a Velodyne F-1500 servo-controlled 15" subwoofer in my main system (with a built-in 250W  amplifier doing the job) and I hear everything there is down there... The thing is, a 32 feet organ stop or a bass drum can produce this frequency at a high level, but not a piano! It is there but very much hidden under all the harmonics and partials.

I did once try copying on CD one of Joe Felice's perfomance where he used the extended low range of the D4 in order to hear it on my main system. Almost no low frequency from the sub! So this is normal for piano, the fundamental is there but not overwhelmingly so.