Pianos don't sound as good in the mix as solo

[madbeatzyo111]

The grand patches sound fantastic alone but not so good in a band because the sound occupies a broad frequency spectrum (in order to duplicate the complex harmonics, resonances, etc. of an acoustic)--parts of which will get buried by the other instruments. As people have mentioned you'll need to tweak it to emphasize midrange, de-emphasize bass, and otherwise compress the frequencies until it sounds really sharp and cutting. Or you could use a bright upright patch.

But what happens when there's a piano solo? You're stuck with the lower fidelity sound that cuts through well but sounds not so great by itself. So how about layer the two (or more) together in a combi and then fade in/out the appropriate parts when necessary in real time? Best of both worlds maybe.

[JPROBERTLA]

Just saw this thread - I've had problems with this issue since sampled digital pianos were introduced (1986 ?); about 15 years ago I purchased a BBE Sonic Maximizer, which is essentially a frequency time alignment processor, to cleanup and record to CD some live cassette tape recordings from 1970 and 1971. It workied fine for this. Eventually, by accident, I played my Yamaha PF85 thru my studio system with the BBE still in the signal path. I immediately noticed something different. After A/B' ing it a few times I could hear it really "tighten up and/or focus" the sound as advertised by BBE. I tried it on the next live gig and have been using them ever since.

You can probably find someone with one to let you try or you can get one for under $200, so its not a huge investment. There are 2 adjustable parameters; start off with both at the 12 o'clock position and work from there. I always try not to get too far from these positions. I have found that after using them for a while, adjusting for each room's acoustics is really very easy.

This worked for me; just a suggestion.

[rrricky rrrecordo]

Just saw this thread - I've had problems with this issue since sampled digital pianos were introduced (1986 ?); about 15 years ago I purchased a BBE Sonic Maximizer, which is essentially a frequency time alignment processor, to cleanup and record to CD some live cassette tape recordings from 1970 and 1971. It workied fine for this. Eventually, by accident, I played my Yamaha PF85 thru my studio system with the BBE still in the signal path. I immediately noticed something different. After A/B' ing it a few times I could hear it really "tighten up and/or focus" the sound as advertised by BBE. I tried it on the next live gig and have been using them ever since.

You can probably find someone with one to let you try or you can get one for under $200, so its not a huge investment. There are 2 adjustable parameters; start off with both at the 12 o'clock position and work from there. I always try not to get too far from these positions. I have found that after using them for a while, adjusting for each room's acoustics is really very easy.

This worked for me; just a suggestion.

Good call, I have an ancient BBE 362 in one of my old racks, I really used to love the subtle sheen it imparted to my mixes back in the day. A quick google search shows prices for new units from 78-99 dollars at a few vendors including Amazon. Good advice to start at 12 o'clock, as I recall things got a bit strident beyond that point, but bypassing the effect always impressed me after it had been in for a few minutes. Some reviewers used to say that enabling the BBE SM was like taking the blankets off your monitors, and that's how it sounded to me too.

I think that you may really be on to something here - does Kronos have a similar enhancer-type effect on board? I think the old Trinity did, I will have a check later tonight when I am back at work.

[Fred S]

Thanks for the tip. I may give it a try!

[rrricky rrrecordo]

Yup, Trinity has a Dyna Exciter which kinda does what the Aphex and BBE stuff did, kinda harsh default so lay back on the gains, plus a 4-band parametric EQ and a 7-band graphic EQ. I would think that Kronos can do all of these effects better. The parametric should allow you to get surgical with your boosts and cuts - I don't have much use for graphic EQ unless there are way more bands and even then there is no control over width, Q and such. Pultecs not withstanding of course

[carmol]

your kronos ha TONS of effects and features to enhance pianos,
why bother with external boxes ?
Some tips to give more "life" and energy to pianos:

-use the set list 9 band equalizer, rising a bit (2-3db) mid-low
around 400 hz and mid high
-double the piano ! in a program u have two slots,
try to assign other slot to the same piano; you can do this also in combi.
-use the compressor ! there are dynamic compressor,
limiter, multi band compressor... every stage piano should
have at least a bit of compression applied
-apply stereo chorus efx with a very very low frequency and depth,
or detune efx
-use parametric equalizer to selectively adjust some frequencies
-try exciter/enhancer <- this can hit the spot !
-try stereo tube preAmp modeling efx to add more warmth
-at last, try HD pianos instead of SGx


now I am just using set list equalizer + compressor

[michelkeijzers]

Thanks carmol for these nice tips. I don't have many problems with pianos, but sometimes with other sounds and some tips are general.

I also don't like extra devices, everything needs cables and can break. I have 2 synths and 2 monitors (and a stand to put it on).

[danmusician]

your kronos ha TONS of effects and features to enhance pianos,
why bother with external boxes ?
Some tips to give more "life" and energy to pianos:

-use the set list 9 band equalizer, rising a bit (2-3db) mid-low
around 400 hz and mid high
-double the piano ! in a program u have two slots,
try to assign other slot to the same piano; you can do this also in combi.
-use the compressor ! there are dynamic compressor,
limiter, multi band compressor... every stage piano should
have at least a bit of compression applied
-apply stereo chorus efx with a very very low frequency and depth,
or detune efx
-use parametric equalizer to selectively adjust some frequencies
-try exciter/enhancer <- this can hit the spot !
-try stereo tube preAmp modeling efx to add more warmth
-at last, try HD pianos instead of SGx


now I am just using set list equalizer + compressor

Be careful how you layer identical pianos (or other timbres), phase cancellation will rear it's ugly head. I would suggest layering 2 similar but not identical timbres to achieve this goal...

[Laste7]

I have good expierience with Pianos in band context with a Combi of Piano and Wurly. (Wurly about 30% of the vel from the Piano).
You will not hear the Wurly in the band context. But it supports the piano very well. That was a tip in this forum a couple of month ago, and for me, it works great.

[arne v]

Hey Pete, did the piano settings work for you or was it "not applicable"
The settings usually fits the bebop sound etc

[RonF]

Just to relay a good studio trick a mentor taught me a long while back....

Its called the 3 by 3 matrix. Think of the stereo field as a big box, with three columns....and three rows. You have left, center, and right (left to right). and you have Treble, midrange, and bass (top to bottom). Now....when you mix, go out of your way to ensure that only 2 instruments fill any space/box in that matrix at any moment in the materials timeline. Anything more....you'll get muddy. You can use whatever tools are at your disposal to accomplish this objective....including EQ and multi-band compression. This reminds you how important PAN is in a mix, something often forgotten in world of stereo electronic instruments. And remember that reverb tails and other delay effects are sonic items which COUNT in this equation....no more than 2 items in any space/box at the same time. It really makes you think....and will cause you to make production decisions which INCLUDE removing parts or instruments for the good of the MIX rather than the desires of the artist. This is why in the pro world, the artist is rarely the producer!

Piano is a remarkable instrument and falls into the same and rare category as the human voice. Its dynamic range covers the full spectrum. So, when you include one in a mix (and of course different pianos have different sonic signatures), you need to use a spectrum analyzer to see where its energy is, and tailor it to fit into the same matrix equation. During a mix, you may lower the bass frequencies to allow for a bass guitar, for example, but then return those frequencies in a bridge or verse where the bass guitar rescinds. Its all material specific.

Of course in a live situation, here is where you rely on a sound engineer. Set it and forget it is ok, but you make sacrifices. A good sound engineer is riding that board throughout the performance to try to "real time mix" that matrix once again.

Food for thought.......

[jimknopf]

I have good expierience with Pianos in band context with a Combi of Piano and Wurly. (Wurly about 30% of the vel from the Piano).
You will not hear the Wurly in the band context. But it supports the piano very well. That was a tip in this forum a couple of month ago, and for me, it works great.

It is a tip I passed from a German musician I know, Xaver Fischer, and one of the best tools for live band play, to give some not disturbing warm bottom to an otherwise cutting through mid-EQed Piano sound.

Ron, the 3x3 image is a nice tool, and I like mixes which work in the way you describe, with conscious reducing, much better than many of todays music industry's mixing results of the "crowded and overcompressed" kind.

But does this image work for the bottom row, where you get into a mono (bass) field? I'd rather guess that you got one more "vertical" division there (between bass drum and electric or synth bass, for example) than a "horizontal" one.

This is a nice thread with a lot of interesting thoughts.

[RonF]

Hi Jim,

I definitely see your point. The 3X3 matrix idea does not *require* that you put two instruments in each "box" on the grid....only that you put no *more* than two in each box. Of course, the art of mixing specific material prevails here........so in your description, with a bottom centered to mono, you'd make those executive decisions in the mix.......and I would whole heartedly agree with your assessment. But I can envision other styles of music where one might spread to stereo even in the bottom frequency range. As an easy example you might picture some floor toms set off to the left side encroaching on this lower spectrum. Done carefully, this will collapse to mono just fine for radio, even if the master has those stereo elements.

BTW...in my pro studio work, I observe executive engineers, whether intentionally or not, taking the 3X3 concept...and sometimes expanding it into a 4X4 or 3X4 (or even 5) interpretation. They are just more tightly managing the crossovers of each space/box in the grid with hard compression and tight EQ, and spacial panners. I watch and learn from this all the time. In my mind...whether they realize they are doing it or not...that is exactly what they are doing. There is a definite sense of repetitive structure in the pro projects I have worked on ....sort of a formula for success. Its different than a typical artists perspective where each "mix" is a blank canvas, and almost anything goes in the name or art. Both approaches can produce spectacular results. But I think I understand the more structured approach better...and its helped me to strategize a good mix in my own work.

[Fred S]

Worked on pianos quite awhile today. Think I'm making some progress. Wasn't able to get a great result with the added Wurli idea yet. But I like the ruddess piano with the HD-1 true stereo patch. They seem to compliment each other well. Still fiddling with the EQ, reverb, subtle piano effects, etc., but getting closer. I think my personal preference is to reduce the attack on the SGX pianos. They seem more playable and responsive. That's it for now, I'll probably haven't a different opinion tommorrow .

[Laste7]

Worked on pianos quite awhile today. Think I'm making some progress. Wasn't able to get a great result with the added Wurli idea yet. But I like the ruddess piano with the HD-1 true stereo patch. They seem to compliment each other well. Still fiddling with the EQ, reverb, subtle piano effects, etc., but getting closer. I think my personal preference is to reduce the attack on the SGX pianos. They seem more playable and responsive. That's it for now, I'll probably haven't a different opinion tommorrow .

Just to point it out: It is a tip for piano sounds in band context....