Quitter
So a couple things. Pianotell and Pianoclack are off-shots of Pianoworld. For both PC annd PT, the primary user ship comes from PW. So, youâre not going to find anything particularly different on either one.
Pianoworld is the granddaddy of all these sites. And, it was always hugely classical-based. Classical, classical, classical. Period. Everything else was often an afterthought. I donât agree that that should be the case, and I have called out the elitism which sometime shows there. Unfortunately, thatâs the way the classical world is: highly (and undeservedly) elitist. Thatâs the nature of it. We have to remember that classical music, as beautiful as -some- of is, was entertainment for extremely rich âsavoir-vivreâ people. They were the cream of the crop: rich and thick. Not particularly or overwhelming intelligent, but wealthy and powerful enough to convince themselves that they are the only ones with class and value and that everything else is just simple âfolkâ music for the peasants. In many ways, that ideology has persisted in classical music, even today. So youâre always going to have an upward battle when youâre in a classical heavy space.
That said, itâs up to us to be the change we want to see. Pianotell is in a nascent stage. Thereâs a great opportunity here to create a space in the image of what you want it to be.
If youâd like to focus on music that is non-classical, you can do that. Navindra seems very open to encouragement and guidance on new sections of the forum, new topics. I donât think anything is set in stone. If youâd like to see more genres and spaces for other styles, I think you should reach out to Navindra, or create a thread and say âHey, we need more than just stuffy classical people ranting about Brahms and Beethoven all day and proclaiming that everything else is inferior.â Goodness knows Iâd welcome it, and Iâm sure many others would. Maybe we should even have a Classical only section, and then a section for modern music, and even break that down into genres as necessary.
What happens at PW or PC doesnât have to be an indicator of what happens here, if people want more.
The piano hierarchy youâve shared is what youâll encounter often, among those who play music with advanced technical requirements. Because itâs true. The more advanced and complicated the music youâre playing becomes, the more you need an action that is super responsive, super fluid, with super repetition speeds, and proper balance and regulation. And unfortunately, it tends to follow that acoustic grand actions tends to be the ones with these abilities the best, because of simple physics and the technology and mechanisms that have been refined over three centuries by dozens of genius technicians to create actions that meet this standard.
Upright actions were a compromise on this, and use a slightly slower mechanism, typically have less regulation, and, because theyâre often cheaper, arenât always made with the best materials like their grand counterparts (which also vary in quality as price goes down).
Then of course hybrids, which are essentially these actions minus the hammers.
And then digital actions, which originally, were pretty bad. Now weâre getting to a point where theyâre improving drastically, and may even be preferable to bad acoustic actions. But, still, some are not yet âthereâ.
And you may harm your technique or miss out on building your technique if youâre not practicing on an acoustic or an action that properly captures the mechanics of an acoustic, because if youâre playing certain genres, like classical or complex jazz, that music was created on actions that had particular qualities, so reproducing it requires a similar action.
So I get the validity of those arguments, and even would teach them myself.
But I guess my feeling is still the same as it is in my previous reply. Why does this matter if YOUR needs are met? If you have no need for some super sprightly action, and the action in your digital is just fine for you, thatâs all that should matter. It might not be âsuperbâ to a user who needs something different, but if itâs good for you, thatâs all that matters. Itâs your journey, your fingers, your needs, your standard. If for the genre you play, the level youâre at, the technique you possess, youâre realizing your goals, then you have what you need.
The hierarchy of piano actions doesnât translate to the value/worth/validity/skill/talent of the people using them.
I consider Elton John and Stevie Wonder among the greatest musical minds of the 20th Century, but goodness knows they donât care about the action anywhere near the way someone who plays Liszt or Monk or Tatum may care. But does that make them less than either of those names? No.
I feel like we need to realize that hierarchy doesnât always translate to value/validity. Itâs just about which actions are more capable at certain requirements, and whether those requirements are apart of your genre
As for PianoteqâŠlisten, if youâre a fan of that, youâre going to have an uphill battle. Itâs probably the most hotly contested VST out there, because of how it creates sound. For some, itâs wonderful, for some it suffices, for others itâs dreadful. I liken it to alternate sweeteners like Stevia or monk fruit or artificial sweeteners. Some people love it and swear by it, and even prefer it to the standard sugar. Others can tell the difference and just want their good old fashioned sugar!
But, again, if you like it, forget those people.
Sure youâll have people like me who donât like it, but Iâve tried my best to keep my tuckus out of Pianoteq-centered threads, because I know I donât like it, and thereâs no reason for me to be in there spreading discouraging thoughts about it. If you encounter people who canât keep their beaks out of Pianoteq-centered threads, tell them that. You have a right to like what you like.
I think we have to create the spaces we want to see, especially when those spaces are in nascent phases and open to development.
