What are your views on PIANO ROLLS?

[Wallingford]

The "reproducing pianos" were in vogue (mainly for bourgeious families) during the first 3 decades of the twentieth century; when electrical recording came of age--enabling the phonograph to reproduce much more accurately a pianist's tone, touch and dynamic range--it all but drove out of business the Ampico & Welte piano manufacturers (the two chief competitors).

It was the aim of these pianos at the time to reproduce more faithfully than ever the actual performance of a famed virtuoso.....quite literally the closest thing to having him in your own home! But with the decades, surviving paper rolls have naturally deteriorated, and original molds and graphs from which the copies were made have all but disappeared, with very few exceptions.

There have been attempts over the years to make brand-new stereo tapes of these performances of surviving rolls, with quality that goes all over the map. The most acclaimed series of recordings was the mid-60s Argo series, with touch and dynamic levels judiciously modified by a collector with a vast knowledge of the various artists' disc recordings to make them as accurate as possible; there are recordings herein by Carreno, the young Nyiregyhazi and others who never made disc recordings. There are other series, too, like the Everest series from the same period (the ones found by generations of college students in bookstore cut-out bins), which used every imaginable roll found even if the roll in question was in decrepit condition........a Dame Myra Hess album, for instance, gave a nice impression of how she must've done Brahms' E-Flat Rhapsody, but an extremely poor idea of how she had to have done Beethoven's Op. 79 Sonata (to name a couple of works she didn't do on disc).

And into the digital era, the restorations have continued, though none with any convincing or accurate results, to my ears: the only palpable advantage being, of course, a spanking-brand-new stereo recording

Anyone else have views on these recordings?

[Lance]

99% of the time, I'm extremely disappointed because these roll transfers certainly do NOT represent the artist as we know them from even their scratchiest 78-rpm discs. Yet we continue to collect them in the hopes that someone out there has finally figured it out.

The EXCEPTIONS to this, thus far, are a series of ARGO LPs utilizing the Ampico method of piano reproduction that were issued some years ago, one of which featured Sergei Rachmaninoff, this latter one reissued by Decca-London on CD [425.964]. Those are the only ones that I have that most favourably captured the original art of the pianist, but even then there was an occasional question mark.

The other two really excellent roll transfers appeared on two TELARC CDs of Rachmaninoff, once again, entitled "A Window in Time," [Telarc 80489 and 80491]. A totally new system was employed here that made sense to me, but once again, one occasional hears something that doesn't sound just "quite right."

All the Fone issues from Italy, and all the LPs that appeared on Everest some years ago (some were transferred to CD), and even some on the Intercord label (with Horowitz!) just didn't cut it for me.

It is my opinion that if any of these pianists could rise from the dead and hear, for themselves, the transfers the mid-to-end 20th century and 21st century has transferred their roll recordings, they might turn over in their graves!

[Holden Fourth]

My introduction to Cortot was via an Ampico LP of his playing via piano roll and made me an instant fan of his playing. I also heard Prokofiev playing his own works the same way. The Rachmaninov "Windows in Time" series took the whole thing a bit further down the track as well..

As to authenticity, well who knows? The first WIT where Rach plays his own works wasn't too inspiring but the second one certainly had me sitting up and listening. Yes, the rolls may have been doctored but SR's genius shone out regardless.

[jbuck919]

I think they're delicious, especially with a little jam.

[Corlyss_D]

I think they're delicious, especially with a little jam.

[Lance]

I think they're delicious, especially with a little jam.

... especially when they are in the shape of a concert grand piano. You can cut them, open the lid, and fill 'em with cream cheese, or peanut butter and jelly. Mmmm, mmmmm, good, just like Campbell's soups!

[Susan de Visne]

My grandmother had a Pianola, and shelves and shelves of piano rolls. (They took up a lot of room.) As a small child I used to love "playing" the Pianola, pretending to be Rachmaninov or whoever. But best of all was to stop "playing", and watch the piano keys move all by themselves! I was too young to judge whether the performances on the rolls were any good, but they were certainly a lot better than I could play at the time, so it gave me a tremendous sense of power. By the time I was old enough to judge, she had a proper piano and a gramophone, and the Pianola disappeared.

[Lance]

My grandmother had a Pianola, and shelves and shelves of piano rolls. (They took up a lot of room.) As a small child I used to love "playing" the Pianola, pretending to be Rachmaninov or whoever. But best of all was to stop "playing", and watch the piano keys move all by themselves! I was too young to judge whether the performances on the rolls were any good, but they were certainly a lot better than I could play at the time, so it gave me a tremendous sense of power. By the time I was old enough to judge, she had a proper piano and a gramophone, and the Pianola disappeared.

Funny, having never met you, I could still envision you playing with the Pianola and I could see the smile on your face thinking you were Rachmaninoff. Thank you for sharing this lovely, sentimental thought with us. It was rather heartwarming.

[daycart]

OK, so these are not hi-fi despite the good sound quality. But it is still thrilling to hear something whose existence was caused by Scriabin or Grieg, or ....

[Lance]

OK, so these are not hi-fi despite the good sound quality. But it is still thrilling to hear something whose existence was caused by Scriabin or Grieg, or ....

It's not "hi-fi" we're concerned with, Daycart ... it's representation of the artist as he really performed. It is more possible to appreciate the art of the performer who made the original recording via old acoustic or electrical 78s because that is the actual sound he created, not a piece of paper with holes punched in, and someone pushing the buttons on the playback piano, adjusting the speed to their own like, not to mention rolls being played on inferior pianos that were not in tune nor properly regulated.

But, as you indicate, it is thrilling to have us believe we are hearing the performer as he really sounded ... it's a mental game this way ... especially if the pianist who created the roll never made any acoustic/electrical recordings. Then we have nothing else to judge the artist by except his paper roll recording.

As stated previously, the most "realistic" roll recordings I've heard appeared on Argo LPs, and one Decca-London CD (Rachmaninoff), and two discs from Telarc entitled "A Window in Time," both featuring Sergei Rachmaninoff.

To put it another way, somewhere I read where the celebrated pianist, Artur Schnabel, was once approached by a piano roll recording company. They were so pleased to tell Schnabel that they had 16 gradations of sound available to him, at which point he said that was too bad, because he played with 17. (The story goes something like that.) But the story also gives you an indication of what was not available to a performing artist insofar as accurately portraying his art. Certainly a pianist/musician the stature of Artur Schnabel could not be fooled, otherwise he would have gladly made the recordings if the technology was so superior, plus he could have made some additional funds (which he liked!) for making these rolls, but it didn't represent his true art. I applaud him for not making them. Don't you agree?

[Lance]

Carrying on with the subject of reproducing pianos ... just for the heck of it, I listened intently tonight to VLADIMIR HOROWITZ playing a group of nine (9) selections recorded in 1926 via the Welte-Mignon process. This includes a Bach-Busoni Adagio from the Toccata in C Major (6:23), the Mozart-Liszt Figaro Fantasie, a Schubert-Liszt selection, some etudes and mazurkas, Rachmaninoff's Prelude in G Minor, Op. 23/5, and one of Horowitz's own pieces, Moment Exotique.

The Welte-Mignon process utilized paper rolls in a machine called a "vosetzer," which means "to place in front of." This device, built by M. Welte and Sons in Freibourg, Germany, would sit "in front of" any piano and contains "fingers" that would take the place of human fingers over the keys. This was probably among the finest and most developed piano roll players the world has ever seen. It's engineering is phenomenal.

Now, everyone who loves Rachmaninoff knows that he considered Horowitz one of the finest interpretators of his keyboard music. Most of us have many (or all) of Horowitz's Rachmaninoff solo recordings on RCA or Columbia/Sony. They are incredible recordings and quite unforgettable. Listening to Rachmaninoff's Prelude in G Minor, op. 23/5 in this Welte recording (the recordings were made in 1986/1987 on a Steinway Model D current concert grand piano, the sound of which is sumptuous. But this is NOT the Horowitz I know from his actual recordings. Pedaling is nothing like his, but there are "hints" of Horowitz here and there. If you listen closely, there are notes almost "dropped" here and there, and his "circular" playing is not evident. The performance is jumpy here and there, and he does not play "in time." His noted agogic accents are there, but again, this is not the Horowitz we know. Even listening to his earliest electrical recordings, he does not sound like this. It's erratic playing in the roll performance. Don't let the sumptuous sound fool you into thinking this is the pianist.

I'm not sure this recording, from Germany on the Intercord label [INT 860.864, released in 1988] is still available. Horowitz fanatics (like me) would obviously purchase this recording because we want every note he recorded. If this recording truly preserved the art of the young Horowitz, this would have become a top-selling CD recording, fully digitized, and in great sound. It's almost, but not quite. I want all of Horowitz at his unique best!

Some years ago, the Book-of-the-Month Club issued a three-LP set of great pianists, composers and teachers performing on Artur Rubinstein's Steinway D under the best possible conditions. When I listened to Theodore Leschetizky playing, I could not possibly believe this was the teacher who taught Schnabel, Paderewski, Ethel Newcomb (whom I heard live on many occasions), Curzon and so many others.

The IDEA of roll recordings is wonderful. It's just that once too many hands are involved in the reproduction of these rolls, everything goes awry. Adjustments are made (despite Welte making available a "test" roll for accuracy of speed and mechanical functions) by individuals who are not acquainted with all of the exigencies of performing a piece of music.

The key word here is "mechanical," and that is how so many of these roll recordings sound to professional musicians and dedicated music listeners.

[Wallingford]

A few works of charitablilty for some roll recordings:

Just about ANY roll (Welte or Ampico) of VLADIMIR DE PACHMANN seems to accurately represent his utterly bizarre, eccentric way of playing; you can quite clearly make out the monkey business he does on Chopin's "Minute" Waltz (like his superfluous run up to the piano's top A-flat during that long trill ushering in the main section's return, which he did also in his disc recordings) or the C-sharp Minor Waltz (the ridiculous fermata he always puts on the opening G-sharp, or his speedings-up of the "refrain" section, or his slowly running out of petrol in the very final phrase).

I think, being a Grieg buff, that it'd be great to find a pristine copy or Percy Grainger's rolls of the great G-Minor Ballade, Op.24, or Grainger's take on the 1st Peer Gynt Suite (he does some neat little things with it that blow away Grieg's own transcription). Grainger did no disc recordings of either work; a mid-50s mono LP of these rolls shows his refreshingly rugged approach to this composer.

And apropos of Leschetizky--Columbia's early-50s "Masters Of THe Keyboard" series has a very nifty performance of him (on Welte rolls) doing his own A-Flat Etude.......would that some modern virtuoso revive this music!

[Wallingford]

AND, a few extra words in favor of composers' own rolls of their own piano works:

DEBUSSY's Welte rolls are illuminating--in part since they reveal how rusty his technique was at the time (and this man was a virtuoso who wrote some of the most innovative piano works ever); but also because they clear up some textual controversies: we find, for instance, that the final D-flat chord of "D'un Cahier d'Exquisses" has no F at all, making just a bare, D-flat/A-flat chord.....MANY well-known virtuosos (Gieseking & Frankl, to name but two) have MISREAD that top staff as an F in the treble clef, rather than an A-flat in the bass clef (which SHOULD be evident from most editions).

Also, in the famous "Englufed Cathedral," we find that Debussy clears the whole metric issue of 6/4=3/2, which REALLY means that 6/4 is equal to TWO BARS of 3/2.....whichever rhythm predominates at this or that section of the piece (either quarter OR half notes) is to be the same value as the other. This is a purely rhythmic issue that's clarified quite conclusively regardless of the piano roll's other representations of Debussy's playing.

Also, any of GRIEG's early-LP-era piano roll transfers give a very good picture of the delicacy of his playing (the Book-Of-The-Month, Allegro & Telefunken series, I mean).

[oisfetz]

Lance: I've an other Horowitz's rolls on a german BELLAPHON form the Condon Collection, taken from 1925 to 32., No.690-07-009. He played the Mozart-Liszt-Busoni fantasie,3 Rach.preludes, 2 Chopin's etudes, S.S-Liszt- Danze Macabrer,Tch.Dumka, a Liszt-Schubert and his own Var.on Carmen,Walz and " moment exotique". 1992, I think OOP and hard to find, but as a fanatic.....

[daycart]

I agree with Lance's points. Piano rolls aren't accurate representations of significant artists. And there isn't much point in listening to rolls when the same pieces from the same period in a pianist's career are available on 78s.
But when all we have of a great artist's work is piano rolls, it seems we should be grateful for that--somethings characteristic of a pianists sound can be recovered (and in nice sound...). Surely we shouldn't refuse to listen or to buy the recordings!

[daycart]

I agree with Lance's points. Piano rolls aren't accurate representations of significant artists. And there isn't much point in listening to rolls when the same pieces from the same period in a pianist's career are available on 78s.
But when all we have of a great artist's work is piano rolls, it seems we should be grateful for that--somethings characteristic of a pianists sound can be recovered (and in nice sound...). Surely we shouldn't refuse to listen or to buy the recordings!

[Holden Fourth]

Probably the most significant one I had was Prokofiev playing his own works, also an ampico LP.

[Jppiano]

Prokofiev isnt a good example, as he made a number of 78 recordings, including his own 3rd concerto. A wonderful performance, BTW....

Those who know me well know that my S.O. became well known for her piano roll CD's - in spite of that, I have never had any regard for them at all; if one knows about the technology, then it is easy to see that they in no way can represent the playing of any pianist accurately. The only conceivable use of piano rolls is to see a pianist's repetoire, in my (always humble) opinion.....

Joe P.