I dont like music with unclear notes, particularly unclear pianos

[SKYIO]

particularly 
I feel as if the people who play some of Chopins music have a broken piano or something. For me a perfect example of actual perfect clear notes is the first part of this piece

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omhHQ2mVWXU&list=LL-Mmf_LTpQZKydrh6JC9OxA&index=7

[XB-70 Valkyrie]

For me this is more of an issue with organ music. Some recordings emphasize the acoustic of the venue/church/hall more than others. If you need to clearly hear every note, then these are often not the best recordings to listen to: e.g., Helmut Walcha's recordings of Bach's organ works are extremely clear, but give little sense of the venue. Marie-Claire Alain's set OTOH, is a mixed bag, recorded on many different historic instruments, and many of these recordings encompass the acoustic of the church. These days I actually enjoy Alain's set more than Walcha's, but that is partly because my mind can fill in some of what is missing (or difficult to hear) in the recordings. These different types of recordings fill different needs and preferences, and I think it is impossible to say that one is "better". I like both.

With the piano, there is a great range as well, not only of recording venues, microphone setups, post-production, etc., but there is also a great range of interpretations, pedaling, instruments, etc. Of course many/most of the greatest recordings were made many years ago, and do not offer the clearest sound. If you are going to disregard all but the "clearest" interpretations, made with the most recent technology, then you are going to miss a lot. Also, comparing a 21st century minimalist/pop composer to Chopin in terms of technique and clarity is not entirely valid IMO--very different styles of music in many respects.

[SKYIO]

Here's 2 of the unclear Chopin songs I was listening to btw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcIMvliWM2I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikBD3DcSGFM
It just seems like a mess, not just clear-wise but organisation wise too. Like it doesn't even have a direction

[mc ukrneal]

Are you sure it isn't rubato that you don't like?

[Jo498]

I don't understand. I listen to the "Raindrop" D flat major Prelude and it via headphones on laptop this is very clear sounding, no distant, echoy sound, neither excessive pedalling (but I don't know much about piano playing, so I might be wrong here). Maybe you do not like the music. Some of Chopin's can give an improvisatory and aphoristic, "irregular" impression, but not the "Raindrop", which is a clearly structured (basically A-B-A' with the contrasting, "darker" middle section connected to the outer sections by the continuous "dropping").
And as it is probably one of the five most popular classical piano pieces ever, many people, including those not frequently listening to classical, apparently have no problems enjoying it...

[SKYIO]

I take back in saying that Chopin's raindrops is also unorganized, but maintain that it is unclear. I feel as if the notes haven't got a clear enough tone to them. No where nearly as clear as that 21st century pop guy anyhow. It may just be the rhythm that I dont exactly like thats putting me off, that or I have a hearing problem

Mc@ I dont even know what that is, but I may be able to answer if you lay-man it for me

[mc ukrneal]

Rubato is a typical feature in much romantic music where the performer slows or speeds up, usually to heighten an interpretation. For example, in the second youtube video (Tristesse), the performer is not following the beat strictly. If you count along with the playing, you will notice the performer slows and speeds up slightly in many places (think pause or rush).

[SKYIO]

Rubato is a typical feature in much romantic music where the performer slows or speeds up, usually to heighten an interpretation. For example, in the second youtube video (Tristesse), the performer is not following the beat strictly. If you count along with the playing, you will notice the performer slows and speeds up slightly in many places (think pause or rush).

Id say thats not the issue here because I like both
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOA-2hl1Vbc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpOtuoHL45Y

Its really just the somewhat unclear notes the people playing Chopins song are making that put my mind in slight disarray, but not in an enjoyable way, I guess distress is the better word, or mild irritation

[Scion7]

Sounds like dissonance is not for you, so you might want to steer clear of Debussy, for one.   

[MishaK]

particularly 
I feel as if the people who play some of Chopins music have a broken piano or something. For me a perfect example of actual perfect clear notes is the first part of this piece

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omhHQ2mVWXU&list=LL-Mmf_LTpQZKydrh6JC9OxA&index=7

There is a crapload of artifical reverb around the first few notes of this one. I'm not sure what there is to like. The only reason this seems "clear" is that there is only one voice at this point, so there are no other harmonies and overtones to "confuse" things.

[Jo498]

There is probably not point in speculating further what exactly is disliked by SKYIO but as neither the "Raindrop" Prelude nor the E major Etude op.10/3 are hardly exhibiting clashing dissonances, I doubt that it's dissonances.

[jochanaan]

I listened to the first parts of two recordings, the one in the OP and the first one in the third post on this thread.  It cannot be the recording; if anything, the latter recording has a clearer, brighter tone than the first.  However, I did observe that the first recording, after the atmospheric opening, was played in strict time, while in the Chopin there was definitely some flexibility in the basic tempo.  Is that what you're objecting to, Skyio?

As a young musician, I could not understand why some performers insisted on changing "perfectly good" tempos. However, as I have matured, I have come to appreciate flexibility.  (I do not like the term rubato, literally "robbed," implying that there is no sense of time.  Apart from ad lib. passages, very few musicians play with no sense of rhythm or time, not even Furtwangler, the arch-Romantic of his generation.  "Flexibility" better describes what actually happens here.)  Both Mozart and Chopin, by their own writings, used considerable flexibility while yet keeping the underlying pulse steady, rather like in jazz where solo singers and players will indulge in considerable rhythm-bending while the drums and bass keep strict time behind them; that's what Chopin meant when he said that his right hand played freely while his left kept strict time.

In fact, the pianist in the linked "Raindrop" recording uses a little more flexibility than I really like.  In my own playing I like to find a middle ground between the extremes of perfectly strict time and unlimited flexibility.  But I cannot deny that flexibility is a legitimate element of the Romantic style.

And there is music in which you don't want the tones to be too clear or regular.  Debussy has been mentioned, and his music is a prime example.  Here is perhaps my favorite recording of "The Sunken Cathedral:" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eoV6wgRfaY.  Skyio, I suggest you do not listen to this one. If the tones were any clearer, the "cathedral" would not be nearly "sunken" enough.

[SKYIO]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uyZJ3rNb4xM I love this Debussy song so Jo48 is probably right.



Now after listening to jochananns Debbusy piece (Nr 10) I am really annoyed at that terribly slow temple, it was irritating but I dont think that is related to the problem because this debussy song I quite like
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5ot-88UV-Y  It sounds clear.





Again its not the tempo, its the clearness of the notes. Obviously if a piece goes ridiculously slow I'm going to hate it but I think a lot of people feel that way. Debussys normal tempo is fine, although still slow, I really do like it

[SKYIO]

Actually it may in fact be the tempo. I just realized how annoying the tempo of Raindrops is, it totally disagrees with me. I dont know why I was going on about unclearness.

But tristesse? That really is unclear, annoyingly unclear but it may just be a studio mistake, broken piano etc.

[mc ukrneal]

Actually it may in fact be the tempo. I just realized how annoying the tempo of Raindrops is, it totally disagrees with me. I dont know why I was going on about unclearness.

But tristesse? That really is unclear, annoyingly unclear but it may just be a studio mistake, broken piano etc.

One thing about that Tristesse is that the tempo is even inconsistent from one hand to the other (especially at the start) at times. Probably it is a question of finishing (or starting) the phrase, but that performance is hard for me to listen to as well (despite loving this music). In any case, it can be hard to identify elements of something you love or hate. Once you do, it will be hard to unhear it though!

[jochanaan]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uyZJ3rNb4xM I love this Debussy song so Jo48 is probably right.



Now after listening to jochananns Debbusy piece (Nr 10) I am really annoyed at that terribly slow temple, it was irritating but I dont think that is related to the problem because this debussy song I quite like
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5ot-88UV-Y  It sounds clear.





Again its not the tempo, its the clearness of the notes. Obviously if a piece goes ridiculously slow I'm going to hate it but I think a lot of people feel that way. Debussys normal tempo is fine, although still slow, I really do like it

I told you not to listen to it.