On Tue, 4 Jan 1994, Kathy Murphy wrote:
 
> Reproductions or replicas have a place.
> It would be snobbery to assume only the original can teach or impart
> information to a viewer/listener.  If you are looking at a great photograph
> of a painting it is just that - a great photograph.  It will convey as much
> information as the medium allows and it will satisfy to the limits of the
> audience.
>
> Recently I saw a Yamaha player piano which could strike the key(s)
> with over 100 various pressures (not like the music box sound of an old player
> piano).  A "real" person played a piece and the piano "reproduced" that
> performance, even the errors - it was wonderful.  Imagine having this
> performance quality (the best of the medium - being the piano) reproducing
> the performance of musicians which many of us will never hear in person.
> It's a great sound, still a reproduction, but nonetheless a valuable,
> informative product.
 
WHile I agree with your first paragraph, I'm not sure what the difference
is between an ultra-sensitive player piano like the Yahama, and an
excellent recording played on excellent equipment?  I like live music
because unexpected things can happen --not just a string breaks so they
have to start the movement over again, but new insights of the performer
that come out in the performance.  Was this just a poor analogy?
 
 
Sarah
 
Sarah Lowengard
[log in to unmask]
4 January 1994
New York CIty