What is "nuance"

My 11 year old son has been taking piano lessons for about two years now. Recently his piano teacher said we should consider getting him a 'real' piano. (We have a Yamaha CVP-92). She felt this was needed for him to learn the finer nuances of playing piano. She even felt this way after playing our CVP a few days ago. I found this interesting. For one, she could not even begin to explain what she meant by these nuances. She just said that they are things you start to hear after playing a piano for long enough. I guess I never got that far. I also took lessons from the same teacher (for 3 years ending a couple of years ago) and she never once mentioned that I needed a real piano. Perhaps I'm not as advanced as my son? In any case, I never felt the CVP was holding me back any and I got enough compliments about my playing I thought I was learning quite well.

So is this nuance thing real?

Regardless of your answers, we are sticking with the teacher. She has a PhD in piano (which I don't even hold against her and she is about the best teacher I've run across in any subject area, and she is an excellent performer as well. So my fist instinct is to believe her. On the other hand, I can't begin to imagine what she is talking about. After all, when one pushes down a key on my CVP it makes virtually the same sound as it does when a key is pushed on an acoustic piano. And the harder I push, the louder the sound. So the variables I know about are which keys I push, when I push them, and how hard I push them, and how long I hold the key down. Same goes for the pedals of course, although in that case how hard you push it shouldn't matter. The response to these variables seem to be the same on my CVP as on my teachers piano. Also the 'feel' of the keys on my CVP (how hard I have to push, when the sound starts, etc.) seems remarkably similar to the feel of the keys on my teachers piano. (In fact I feel much larger variations just moving to different piano brands, and even more differences when playing an upright).

One thing I am aware of, is that on an acoustic piano, when more than one note is played at the same time (which is most of the time the vibration of one string can be effected by the vibration of the other strings making the note sound slightly different depending on what other notes are being played. I'm pretty sure my CVP doesn't emulate this characteristic. Is this one of the nuances my teacher 'feels'? It is a little hard for me to imagine how this effect could be so important to the art of piano playing.

Another effect I'm aware of is that the pedal on my CVP is effectively an on/off switch where as on a real piano there are effect to depressing the pedal part way. However I also doubt that this effect accounts for any of this mysterious 'nuance'. For one, it seems that half peddling is rarely needed. I did play one piece where my teacher suggested it, but I believe I was able to learn that technique even though I only played on a piano once a week where half peddling was possible. Also I believe more modern CVP models simulate partial peddling, and I doubt moving up to such a model would change my teachers opinion.

I realize that not all things in music can be easily expressed in scientific terms, but you have to excuse me because I'm an engineer and that gives me the curse of having to try to do such a thing whenever possible. (Not to mention that it will be darned hard to fit a real piano in my living room

Yes. A piano has real strings that are really struck by real hammers. A digital piano does not. That's what she's talking about. She's talking about the finest of distinctions in the quality of the tones created by pressing a key. I have a CLP-840, and the touch is nothing like my teacher's Steinway. This is supposedly a good digital, but it's a toy compared to a real piano. The keys make noise, which I hate, and the touch is way too light, no matter what I do. I have little control over the sound production except ON and OFF. Playing legato where it's really necessary and where it could be done on a real piano is next to impossible. For example, the Fugue in the Toccata in D Major requires legato at the beginning and I simply cannot do it on this instrument. On a piano, I can. What your teacher is *really* getting at, though, is the development of your son's ability to not only play, but to HEAR.

If you can afford it, get a real piano, even just a used upright. I'd get the real thing if I could; I still might do it, but it's doubtful.

[snip]

I have a CVP-109

Nuance would be many of the things you described. But primarily, the CVP sound is only going to have about 128 distinct volumes (thanks to MIDI) for expression. Also, the control needed to play soft passages on a piano takes more skill on a piano than a CVP, yet is more expressive on a real piano.

It sounds like she's lumping in not only nuance of control, but also nuance of sound generation. The *experience* of playing a real piano certainly is more 'organic' in that it is capable of infinite analog (as opposed to discrete digital) expression and more complex waveforms. You could always try renting a piano and using real world experience to compare the two options - rather than trying to think your way into one over the other. I think you'll find yourself playing the real piano more often than not. That is, until it goes out of tune. Then you'll head back to the CVP. : )

I don't have a real piano because I live in an apartment. Its funny but I don't use any of the bells and whistles on the CVP. I only bought it for its superior action and decent grand piano sound.

Regards,

Nuance is a word that covers a broad range of interpretive devices. Among these would be fine-tuned control over dynamics, subtleties of pedalling, different qualities of touch, from sharp staccato to legatissimo, and, one of the biggies, balance - bringing out one note or voice to be primary over all the others, in a way which leads the listeners' ears to hear what the performer wishes them to hear. Most of these can best be practiced on an acoustic instrument. Some will transfer to a digital instrument, if the level of control has been well-enough mastered, but some cannot ever be duplicated on a digital instrument to this point in time. For instance, the strings generate overtones, which have a very important role in proper pedalling. The lowest tones generate the most overtones, so, in terms of balance, the lowest notes must be firmly sounded and caught in the pedal at just the right moment if the upper tones are to sound the best. The digital instruments I have tried do not have the sensitivity of touch in either key or pedal to make this work ideally. There are many other examples in which digital pianos cannot duplicate the beauty possible on a well-played quality acoustic instrument. Of course, there are places and reasons where and why digitals might be the best solution. (Headphones, limited space, ability to stay in tune, ability to MIDI to computer, other built in sounds, budget ,etc).

So, is your son hearing them on her piano yet?

nuance. Not a worn-out 100-year-old upright or cheap baby grand from the '50s (for example).

For sure. I've tried 'grands' that are almost binary. Soft or loud !

Actually, one can get more nuance from a Yamaha P80 than from a cheap acoustic ...

What's recommended if one's looking for a decent used upright?

- Andrys

Having been a musician for 40 years, when I do the same exact thing as you describe, I can tell the difference, blindfolded. I've sat and played some expensive digital pianos, and my ears are disappointed everytime, though the average non-musician probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference. In fact, after 15 minutes of playing a digital piano, I am wholly unsatisfied at the experience, and want for the richer sympathetic acoustics of real hammers hitting real strings.

If I sentenced to only a digital piano at my disposal, though it would be better than nothing, I suppose, I think I would cry.

Thing is, the mind and ears does much of its development in younger years, so my strongest advice is please don't deprive the young one of a richer experience, down the road, if you, yourself, are unable to, at present.

The child, in later years, will thank you handsomely. Your teacher speaks the truth.

Patrick Lockwood

One of the real problems with only practicing on a digital piano is the inability to make the tone sound bad. Pianists must learn how to get good sound out of the instrument.

To be fair, my parents have a 40-year-old Kawai console. Its touch and tone are miserable. It's nothing like my Roland FP-3, and it's farther still from any Steinway.

The Roland, however, is serviceable even when compared to our Yamaha U1. The Yamaha has superior tone, but the voicing of its hammers is such that it's less dynamically responsive than the Roland. Sure, there are 'nuances' between them, but there are nuances between _any_ two pianos, even between units of the same model, and the differences between our digital Roland and acoustic Yamaha are not as great as the gamut of differences among the acoustics my children play from recital to recital and from friend's house to friend's house.

The advantage of having both a digital and an acoustic is that the family fights less over who gets to practice, and everyone learns to adapt to the subtleties between two different pianos.

I don't think so. The point of my piano teacher is that he is not likely to unless he practices on a real piano every day.

Even though I can't hear it, enough of you are saying it exists that I'm supposing it must. However I'm nut sure that its what

My ears don't care how the sound is generated, they just care what the vibrations are. The sounds generated from my CVP are essentially recorded from a real piano. Of course even with the best stereo and speakers, this sound can't be recreated perfectly, although it can come close. However this is not what my teacher is talking about. For instance she claims the nuances still are apparent even when hearing the piano in a recording played on a system that is no better than the one amplifying the sound from my CVP.

Yes the keys make noise, but if you turn up the volume to be as loud as the sounds coming from an acoustic piano, you won't hear that noise anymore. Even the keys of a real piano make some noise. The key also hits a stop and the hammers hit stops too. Put the piano makes so much other noise (music?) that you can't hear it.

This is the most bizarre thing Bonnie has said yet. Do you have it in the harpsichord setting or something? That mode is designed to be On/Off since a real harpsichord doesn't have any dynamics either. In any other setting, I hear the same range of loudness and softness that I hear on my teachers piano, depending on how hard I press the key. (But what do I know. I'm obviously just a beginner, but I don't think you experts know how to communicate what you are hearing).

My understanding is that legato is the blending of one note smoothly to the next and is controlled by when the first note is released relative to with the second note is depressed. Why would this be any different on a digital piano? The attack and decay of each note is programmed to mimic the attack and decay produced by the real strings of a real piano.

This is the most promising suggestion as a significant contributor to 'nuance' that I've heard yet. But after more reflection, I'm still somewhat skeptical. As I understand it, the midi velocity encoding ranges from 0dB to -36dB which is quite a healthy dynamic range. I doubt anyone could actually play 36dB softer than their loudest notes. The 7 bit encoding (128 levels) then gives a resolution of about 1/4 dB which is actually quite fine. In acoustics we use the term bnd (barely noticeable difference). bnd varies a lot depending on the situation, but it is generally considered to be around 1 dB. So one would think 4 times that resolution would be sufficient for the Midi encoding. Also although the midi encoding is limited to 7 bits for the key velocity I'm not convinced that the keyboard itself is that limited when playing live. However even if it is, it doesn't seem like this would be a big limitation. The other reason for my skepticism is that it is not very expensive to make a high resolution velocity transducer (say 4096 steps or more). If it was that easy to make a keyboard more expressive, it would already have been done. (There would be a lot of money to be made if one could make such a keyboard).

The lowest tones on my CVP also generate more overtones than the higher tones. (Again - the sounds CVP sounds are pretty similar to a recording of the sound from a real piano). So the problems of balance should be similar on my CVP to an acoustic piano. Regarding the pedaling, perhaps my CVP's on/off pedal is not 'sensitive' enough as you put it, but I haven't heard anybody say that the more modern keyboards with a continuously variable pedal are more expressive. As far as the sensitivity of the key that you speak of - you haven't given me any idea of what that is.

Many other examples? I'd be happy with just one at this point.

From your responses (esp. Patrick's) I'm growing more convinced that there is some truth to the greater expressiveness of a fine acoustic piano, I'm also growing more convinced that nobody knows why. If any of you could tell me why, I'm sure I could design a 'nuance module' to add to the next generation of digital pianos and we could both become millionaires!