Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Forum Fake vs. Real

Hi Gang,

Today on the CBC's "As It Happens," there was an interesting interview concerning digital instruments (thingies) as opposed to acoustic instruments. Though not specifically referring to pianos, it is a topic which is often discussed on this forum.

http://www.cbc.ca/asithappens/popupaudio.html?clipIds=2438030247

Let's hear your opinion of the interview and of the debate!

I was listening to it.

My thoughts are:

1. Purist hates the infringing digital era.

2. Her version of the theme lacked the depth of sound that the original theme sounds has.

3. I personally don't consider the cover she made that great sound quality wise. I consider the following a better one, here.

My thoughts on the scenario:

The music has done its job, it has people getting inspired. Whether it is inspired to replace it out of hatred, or inspired to listen to more music because of it.

Music created on MIDI is just as valid as music created by an actual instrument.

Before I hear that I'll just say that the distinction between "Fake" and "Real" is artificial.
The music is what matters, how it is produced is largely irrelevant.
Wool/cotton or nylon/synthetics ?
FUNCTIONALLY clothes keep me warm.
I don't wear animal skins so ALL my clothing is "artificial".

Pianos and wooden guitars are no more "natural" than semiconductors - they don't grow in the wild, there are no saxophone trees.
The materials and manufacturing processes are different, so what ?

If you can make music with it then pretty much by definition it is a musical instrument.

So, as the saying goes; Lets just shut up & PLAY
==================================
EDIT:
OK, now that I have listened to it.
WOW, Yes, and OF COURSE the "live played" version sounds different - the whole MIX brings it UP.
"Better" ? It is LOUDER for sure.

The FAKE part of this is in bringing the cello out, that could have been done on the mixer board and would have been just as convincing.
Convince with VOLUME, etc.

Trivia; Eleanor Rigby (Beatles) Physical or electronic cello line ?

BTW, anyone remember the original broadcast of Seinfeld ?
The plucked bass lick that plays scenes out ?
Don't google it. String bass, electric bass, or synth ?
Does it matter ?

Lets just PLAY.

I love Game of Thrones. I very much enjoy the theme from the show. The sound of the real cellist was infinitely more expressive and gripping than whatever was used in the original version.
It is odd that HBO went so cheap in this area when they are spending such big bucks on things like real locations in the show.

I agree with Lara wholeheartedly. For those that don't know Lara St John, she is a fantastic violinist, as an aside.

Cool - I love the responses.

R B - I chose 'Fake' for a reason. It clearly indicates my position, and that's why I put it in an acoustic forum. Fake Fur is a common usage and I don't find it as luxurious as "real." I'm glad you listened and appreciated the difference.

Shiver - Thanks for the link to the performance of the quartet playing all acoustic instruments. It is certainly superior to the re-mix provided by Ms. St. John.

Keith - The discussion about costs involved is a major point. It is truly unfortunate when the 'bean counters' seem to be held in higher esteem than do performing musicians on acoustic instruments.

They're all real. Is a Vox Humana pipe organ stop "fake" human voices? Is a square wave on an analog synthesizer a "fake" clarinet? No, they're real pipe organ and synthesizer voices. A mellotron may have been intended as "fake"strings, and a Rhodes as a "fake" piano, but then what happened? They both quickly became instruments in their own right.

For me the interesting question is what is being done with the instrument(s) in question. I've never seen "Game of Thrones" so I was not familiar with the theme music until I heard the radio clip. Neither version made me want to buy the soundtrack.

Larry.

Remember the radio commercial on the title sequence of "WKRP in Cincinnati"? - "Don't buy cheap imitations-get genuine Naugahyde!"

Can I bring the topic closer to home? I listen to "Exploring Music with Bill McGlaughlin" every night at dinner. To paraphrase Bill and the NEA, it's great radio that deserves a great nation.

As a pianist I'm always struck by his decision to use a digital piano for demonstration purposes. But you know what? I've gotten used to it.

Larry.

I once bought, on my travels, a "genuine fake" Rolex watch in the Far East, sold by a street vendor, for US$10 (he didn't want any other currency). He made no bones about the fact that it was a cheap copy, and ran on batteries, but it looked good.

I bought it in a hurry because my genuine (Swiss-made) Omega self-winding watch had given up the ghost after five years, and I needed a replacement on the spot (I normally avoid buying 'genuine fakes', no matter how genuine they are).

Over 12 years later, that genuine fake is still keeping perfect time, and just needs a new battery every three years .

My Roland V-Piano can be regarded as a genuine Roland, or a fake acoustic piano. Either way, it keeps its tuning, and its action is still as good as the day I bought it over three years ago - despite the three-hour pounding I give it every day. Oh, and it sounds pretty good too, through my headphones (it has no speakers)......

Thanks for the post, Marty.

Digital instrumental sound samples is synthetization in its malignant form. Not much better than a PDF "read out loud function," it is robotic, expressionless, unfeeling, choppy. The antithesis of human emotion.

In only a generation or two, the eardrum has been fed with enough synthesized or digital music to become the so-called "new normal."

Hopefully, this too will pass.

Does a "genuine fake" come with a certificate of "non-authenticity?"

"Genuine fake" Rolexes do! No matter how well the case and band have been copied, the stepwise motion of the second hand certifies it as a genuine fake in exactly one second.

Larry.

The watch came with an expensive-looking gold-colored tag attached, which proclaimed "Genuine" (but no 'Rolex' after it) .

I bought it from that particular vendor because of his refreshing honesty - he proudly displayed a large card with "Genuine Fake watches - expensive Brands!" written on it, on the rack with the watches. How could I resist?

I suppose Fake Books did sound better on a Roland*.

*Meant to say Rhodes. Oh well, same church, different pew.

I have to disagree. Digital sound sources do not make robotic, expressionless, unfeeling, choppy, performances. Robotic, expressionless, unfeeling, uncaring performers do. And they can do it as easily on a tier 1 acoustic piano as they can on a digital portable.

Larry.

It is BACKING music, it isn't as if the show scrolls up the credits with "played on 100% original period acoustic instruments (by original players)".

re cost: Yes, a few hundred bux is trivial against a network's annual income, but it is almost certainly a LARGE part of some producer's assistant's budget and that person would likely be beaten around the head and shoulders for a SINGLE line item excessive cost - and/or for bringing in "quality" that makes everyone else's project look bad

However, it is not backing MUSICIANS.

Replacing an ensemble of instrumentalists with a single syntheseur is hardly backing music or musicians.

Well that raises an interesting question. How much of Lara St.John's (and others') objection is attributable to the diminished expressiveness of the performance and how much is attributable to keyboard players putting other musicians out of work?

It's an important distinction because Ramin Djawadi (who I presume actually performed the faux cello part, principally on a digital controller) would have had all of the digital tools available to have added considerably to the expressiveness and authenticity of the sound if he had wanted to, which I'm not so confident of, because it would have been relatively easy to have done so if that was the sound he wanted. In other words he got the sound he wanted, not the sound he was limited to by digital sources.

And if he had chosen to create a more expressive performance there still would have been no job for a cello player that day.

Larry.

That's an interesting point.

Bear McCreary is someone who's work I follow since BSG and then, he seems to have followed me or I followed him to a lot of shows. I know, I followed him

He seems as comfortable with an orchestra as he is with MIDI and software:

www.bearmccreary.com/#blog/blog/battlestar-galactica-3/bg4-sine-qua-non/

"As for MIDI sequencing, I use Digital Performer, because it suits my needs the best. But, I know guys that work in Cubase or even Logic (although it's shortcomings are stunning). As I mentioned in the other post, Reason is probably not powerful enough for scoring purposes. But then again, whatever software that allows you to expressive your musical vision is the one you should use."

He reaffirms it on his board here

Now, you should read the whole thing to ensure I'm not making him out to be saying something he's not, however, he also talks about budget in one of his Youtube videos about Marvel Agents of Shield here 0:59->1:19

So, you know that weekly, the cost of having musicians can definitely chew away a budget.