Video není dostupné.
Omlouváme se.
Erard 1843 vs Pleyel 1843
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 12. 2015
- A sound comparison between two beautiful instruments from 1843: an Erard and a Pleyel.
The comparison has been recorded after the restoration, made by BIZZI - Historical Keyboard Instruments
www.bizzi.com
Wow....The Pleyel piano had a stunningly velvety and rich tone....No wonder that piano inspired Chopin to write his preludes and nocturnes for THAT PARTICULAR PIANO! Bravo....
Inspired Chopin??? But it is you my dear fella
@@moriscengic hahaha
Well the nocturnes of his were composed before he was introduced to pleyel piano
Even Schubert's sounds much better on Pleyel piano! I wish to listen the complete piece from this pianist.
I have a restored 1905 Pleyel upright and it also has this wonderful intimate, velvety sound. I absolutely love it. I sense modern pianos all sound closer to each other, while back in the day each brand made sure they had their own disctinct personality. Very interesting comparison!
That's so cool! How hard are they to get?
@@Sam-gx2ti easy lots about but restoration is expensive
@@ciararespect4296 I think I'd rather pay for restoration on those ones than for any other piano; Pleyel's are so beautiful and they were Chopin's piano of choice
Unfortunately its 'intimate velvety' sound was apparently very difficult to hear in the concert hall- better for the salon. Chopin suggested that Erards had too much of a 'ready made' tone.
@@nickjgunning That's why, as far as I know, Chopin told students that "Concerts are never real art..." and that "...one loses all the most beautiful things in music." I think that's what he must have meant.
Evidently with Chopin, the beauty is in the subtleties. It must have been amazing to hear him play; I'd happily chop off a toe or a few even just to time travel and hear it!
Easy to see why the Pleyel was Chopin's piano of choice - what a mellow tone that instrument gives.
The sound of Pleyel might be closer to what we imagine of Chopin. While Erard sounds somehow towards modern pianos-reminds me of some of the old Grotrian-Steinweg, and Petrof I've played. Although the technique were very much different. Bravo for the pianist! Dreaming of playing these instruments. Thanks for restoring these great pianos!
Great comment. :)
Chopin played on a pleyel so you're right with that one
Chopin played on pleyel and Liszt played on Erard
Every pianist is unique.
And different every day.
Some days are good,
Some days are better.
And some days the Stars and Planets are in sympathy.
I love the Pleyel sound.
Thank you for this demonstration.
Its quite amazing how these instruments have held up so well omg
My Collard and Collard from 1902 still gives me huge pleasure after 25 years of ownership. The tone and action are perfect despite its age.
I played a Pleyel at a place I stayed in Paris, once...It was as if my feeling was spoken directly by the keys. When I felt shy, the sound seemed to have a shyness, tremulousness in it, as my feelings changed it played exactly that. The old Pleyels had a different action than we have now, super sensitive apparently. I thought, what a piano for a really fine player to practice? play? communicate with, so revealing. Not easy, no cheating here. I kind of got the feeling that it was like a horse, if you know horses, large, (it was a grand) emotional, sensitive.
It sounds like you played an early 1900 Pleyel or late rormantic era Pleyel, such as Cortot would have played in his studio. Not a Chopin's era Pleyel. I too once played a Pleyel for hours, it was from 1845, privately owned. 14 years later, i am not over it. I don't consider modern pianos worthy to be called the same instrument. It felt like the wood resonance played a much more dominant role in the production and sustain of the sound than in modern piano where only the spruce soundboard matters and the strings have tons of tension, a cast iron plate and the pinboard layered wood plays no role in resonance. Whereas on the Pleyel the strings have more reasonable tensions, and their resonance partially transfers directly into wood in addition to the soundboard. This create a totally different sound and the action is more direct intimate on the strings. On modern Steinways the sound vibration is purely metallic before it reverberates on the wooden soundboard which gives it, no singing quality and no soul. It may be hard to understand without having played a Chopin era's Pleyel. because a modern piano can sound beautiful but i insist even then it has no soul and pale in comparison for singing sound. It has a lot more power and that is the main reason it has become this loud machine.
After having played the Pleyel i completely understand why the virtuoso pianist/composer is an extinct animal. If i owned such a Pleyel it would be difficult to *not* compose because the instrument so naturally sings, it asks to express your most subtle feelings, whereas modern pianos require tremendous work of a score over time at the piano to create a nuanced performance, and no doubt a lot more transfer of force to the fingertips simply because the action has more inertia with bigger hammers. The modern piano is not a spontaneous expressive instrument it requires a lot of premeditation working a score to shape it. It's like trying to carve a Michelangelo in granit, it can be done but requires a lot of work. It is why that has become a profession of its own : performance pianist who do not compose are indeed what the modern piano has caused.
And yet if you talk to a Steinway representative they fail to understand that it's not the manufacturing techniques that are the problem but the paradigm of what a piano should do and be. All i can say it that it's a lot different than Chopin's piano.
The pleyel had soul and if you stood outside by a window it sings so beautifully for a second you weren't sure if you were hearing several wood instruments playing chamber music because each register has very distinct sound quality. The bass is incomparable to the modern piano. Far better but yes it will not produce the bombastic explosive blacksmith sound a modern piano does on the bass register at forte. I'd say the Pleyel is a ppp to mF instrument. F is only marginally louder than mF. It is like a human voice but with the woodsy beauty of woodwinds and violins.
The exact same exprrience that I had with a Pleyel in Paris, it was a living thing! Wow.
Any chance we stayed at the same place, was it in Madeleine ? …
Totally agree. I’m planning to acquire a Pleyel, I’m nostalgic of that particular relationship I had with a Parisian Pleyel. Can you please give your insights on the subject, going after a Chopin ‘s era or rather 1900s? I’m specifically looking fot that sensitivity, nuances and soul…
Also, is any remarks about the size (grand piano, 1/2 or 1/4 or pianino, etc.)
I’d be so grateful! :)
To really hear a Pleyel, listen to Cortot’s recordings: he only used the Pleyel, as this was Chopin’s preferred instrument. But, of course, one must also take into account that Cortot’s sound was unique among pianists!
erard sounds to me more like modern piano while pleyel sounds more intimate. both sounds beautiful.
I wonder how many pianos are more intimate and soft in sound without having harsh overtones.
@@hellomate639 i remember some German pianos have this kind of warm sound and still have a soft overtone without the duplex scale, Blüthner and Pfeiffer are the brand i remember.
@@erick-gd7wo Bluthners are awesome, though I thought of their sound as cool and soft as opposed to warm and mellow.
@@hellomate639 so much agree with you. So sad that only Steinway get all the glory and one by one German brand died out.....
@@erick-gd7wo That American marketing and industrialism seemed to do it. People glorify competition but don't realize how damaging it can be, how it creates some hierarchies that serve little purpose.
The Pleyel is so beautiful i love this sound, so Profound
Liszts favourite Erard vs Chopins beloved Pleyel. You don't often get the chance to hear them in the same video! Fantastic, thank you very much! Love the Pleyel!
Pleyel was Chopin’s favorite. Both are excellent.
Vous avez dû avoir un plaisir immense à restaurer ces deux joyaux de la manufacture française.
Chopin prefered to play the Pleyels because of their softer tones.
Could you tell me what makes Pleyel Pianos sound so mellow? Thats something i wonder about for quite a long time
@@microsoftice6498 Rabbit felt hammers. They're softer than our modern ones
...actually, it is reported that Chopin endorsed both makes, but preferred a Pleyel because the Erard had a ‘ready-made’ tone, whilst with the Pleyel
... you had to ‘work at the tone’ which, ultimately made it more flexible...
Les deux instruments ont leur charme propre : Erard pour son caractère et le Pleyel pour sa rondeur moelleuse...
Thanks to everybody for your comments, most of them are very interesting.
The idea was not to make a technical comparison of each aspect of the two instruments (this would not be possible in a 5 minutes video on CZcams), instead the purpose was to show the big differences in the voice and colour after an accurate restoration.
Some of your comments could open an interesting discussion. As you have remarqued, we confirm that the Pleyel has a more intimate sound, it is more difficult to play but it gives the possibility to work deeply with the colour nuances. The Erard is a more powerful and bright instrument, which goes more in the direction of the modern piano.
Any further comment is welcome.
p.s. sorry for the mistake about the nocturne number
I have only just seen your posting hence my late comments above. I found your comments and the whole comparison extremely helpful and very interesting. Thank you once again.
They are both wonderful and beautiful instruments. A pleasure to see and hear. Thank you.
Fantastic Job !!!
Was the Erard restored? It sounds like someone put harder felt on the hammers
I can understand why Chopin prefered Pleyel. It is soft in pianissimo and bright in mezzoforte. Very unique quality
The Pleyel has such a beautiful voice, a personality all its own. Rich, warm, yet singing.
Still weird to hear what Chopin would have heard. It's like being transported back 200 years. Everything else moved on but these pianos stayed stuck in time and give us a window of opportunity to hear a different era. I doubt modern genres will ever be able to be relevant in 200 years like these classical greats..
you mean modern like Ligeti and such or pop music? because i dont see why Ligeti or Prokofiev even would be forgotten compared to the romantics.
@@GeorgeZwierzchowskipianomusic No no, I mean literal modern music such as pop etc. Not Modern classical composers i.e. early 20th century or the contemporary.
Great comparison. We are very happy different pieces were played on each piano.
This ideal was very effective because it presented a greater sonorous aesthetic.
For true comparison, the same pieces should have been played. Different pieces cause different sounds.
In general I agree that a comparison should be made with the same pieces. However, in order to express at its best the inner quality of the instruments - one should play pieces which fit the instrument. For ex.: the Sonata by Chopin was played best on the Erard because of its bravura-nature. The Nocturne and the Mazurka (by the same composer) were played best on the Playel, in which its registers - the higher and the lower - have greater difference, thus making the higher one 'sing' the melody (without loosing its clarity), whereas the lower one accompany in less vibrating sound. It is not a matter of "good" or "bad" or personal preference. It is a matter of an internal essence: the nature of the instrument and the nature of the piece, both expressed together. Adding a very good and sensitive pianist like Mr. Alessandro Comellato, the result of this FINE UPLOAD deserves a big BRAVI for all its participants and a big THANKS for giving us this comparison (or better use the word "versus") in natural conditions and not in a cold 'objective' sound-lab!
Yes, playing the same pieces provides for a more interesting comparison.
in 3:00 it is not the Nocturne, but Berceuse op. 57
Right on !
Ikr i was happy for a second but why
It's in the same key though :P
I almost lost my mind for a second. I was like, all this time I've been calling the Berceuse lol.
A great emotion for me to listen to Erard's sound...it was the favourite piano of my idol Adolfo Fumagalli. Awesome...
Very nice project and video..... stunning! Thank you for sharing!
The second piece is erroneously identified as nocturne op 27 no 2 when in fact it is op 57, the berceuse. While they are in thee same key, the form is completely different.
What we all hear is so subjective. Remarkable, really. It was a clear demonstration of difference. There is no winner, simply what you like listening to the music from. Imo, you can hear why Chopin chose the Pleyel, sweeter in sound than any other. Thank you for posting.
The most significant factor in piano sound is the structure and material of the hammerheads. If one should put the Pleyel heads on the Erard and vice versa one could be surprised how similar they sound.
thank you for illuminating for us the difference between these 2 historical verities...now i understand what Chopin was talking about .when he referenced Erard and Pleyel. Seems as though the piano of the present day descends from the Erard...hmm...interesting.
Alec, If you don't like gays, consider not listening to their music. Chopin was one. The only gal he was close to was a lesbian writer, George Sand, who used a man's name.
Also most pianists today are also gays. In fact Horowitz said that there are only 4 types of pianists: Jewish, Russian, gay, or lousy. Horowitz was the best as he fulfilled 3 of those 4 qualifications.
Chainsmashers.pbworks.com/SJWS+Fandoms+Antis+General+Trolls+And+Reality+Checks
He's a juvie-minded troll. You're just plain wrong.
That Pleyel! Warm, almost an Alto voice Is it strung in 'choruses' (bass, tenor, alto and soprano) like the Hagspiel?
That Pleyel! Warm, almost an Alto voice Is it strung in 'choruses' (bass, tenor, alto and soprano) like the Hagspiel, for instance
Nicely played. I much preferred the Pleyel, especially with Chopin. Very interesting. Grazie mille.
You are an incredible pianist. Wish I listened to your complete rendition of the Berceuse and the Barcarolle !
I think that like string instruments, the wood of pianos when they have aged, resonates better and gives a more mellow sound.
What a surprise to hear such a beautiful sound from such period instruments. They have been restored no doubt, but would they have sounded like this when first built? Were original materials and methods used? I wonder also if the tuning is accurate equal temperament or a version of the more likely unequal temperaments used in that era.
The comparison seems unplanned, but I do like the tone of the Pleyel better.
Yes indeed the Pleyel is much sweeter than the Erard - wish I had one. I think there is a video of Wanda Landowska playing Mozard on an upright Pleyel same intoneation.
Oh I love your playing of the Schubert piece on the Pleyel piano! What sweet music. Soothing my mind
I prefer the Pleyel. They are both very nice and offer different sonorities. The Erard has more bite in the tone and probably greater power. The Pleyel has greater purity. I also think the Pleyel has a wider range of timbre depending on the touch.
Wonderful music. I really like your playing, you have a very nice touch. The pianos sound amazing btw.
Pleyel seems quite suited for quiet playing and Errard seems more suited to the flamboyant and very dramatic music.
There are so many Pleyel-Chopin comments... please don't forget that Liszt played Erard. These are two different instruments for different musicians with different musical "visions". Also the two instruments might be of different original quality, different restoration quality, different intonation quality. Intonation can work miracles on such historic pianos and depends on the "chemistry" between the instrument and the piano technician.
From what I read, Liszt wasn't impressed with the Pleyel pianos. He purportedly called them "pianinos".
Chopin's favour instrument, because of the lighter touch. In this recording I think there are some metallic tones, but the over-all sound of this instrument -- typical Chopin at 02:57 - is so beautiful. ❤BTW it is the Berceuse op.57 (not a nocturne).
Another restoration at v=nIDvUVnIpnI does not have the metallic tones. Honestly I think I would like a replica more. Pianos have a different way to grow old, almost like humans, they get all kinds of illnesses when they get old. A violin actually also have age problems, but that is quite another story!
Thanks a lot, I own an erard myself and love the unique tone.
Very good idea to compare such two instruments !
Fantastic! One needs to have BOTH pianos in their studio! Did you use Paulello wire? Leather covered hammers on the Erard? Rabbit fur hammers on the Pleyel?
A friend of mine has a 1930s Pleyel that is magnificent. You can't play Rachmaninoff on it, but for Schumann, Faure, Debussy, even Brahms, it is sublime.
Rach is over notes, senseless garbage. Nothing but bang bang bang and no musical value.
Solid Snake Oooooh I couldn’t possibly disagree more.
I have a Pleyel grand piano built in1926 (I have verified the correct date) and I also have a Steinway model A built in 1989. The 'silvery tone' that Chopin talked about and was one of the reasons he chose the Pleyel instrument over any other. My Steinway is in almost new condition given that it was not played very often by the previous owner. The beautiful tone of the Pleyel is still present although it does need some restoration work done. I have had several people advise me that it would not be worth spending the money on although being a very keen amateur pianist, I don't hold the same opinion. If there is anybody in that can advise me, I would be very grateful. I realise that a decision cannot be made without seeing the instrument but have had this piano since I was 21 and I am now 67! I realise that my input here should reflect an opinion on the above Erard v Pleyel. Immediately the Pleyel was played, I recognised the tone which Chopin so often mentioned, and although Erard pianos were played extensively by great artists in years gone by, I think Pleyel has the edge.
First thing to know is whether your Pleyel is cross-stringed or parallel stringed. Chopin was playing parallel-stringed Pleyels. If your Pleyel is parallel-stringed then it is definitely worth restoring.
Erard for noon Pleyel for midnight
I like Erard sound.
There s a mistake in the subtitles the first piece played on the pleyel is berceuse op 57 not nocturne op. 27 no.2
The PLeyal is a clear winner in terms of tonal color but I do agree that the same pieces done at least on some of these test pieces would be more helpful.
It's interesting to see how most of people here are for Pleyel which, as we all know, was favored by Chopin, while Liszt hated Pleyel for being too quiet for playing in the concert halls. It's understandable. We now have microphones and yes, for intimate saloon playing Pleyel was better for sure. 😁
both sound beautiful, the Playel more so. Old piano use the kind of wood that is of high quality and beautiful
Hammers of this time did not have the same weight as todays .
0:08 Chopin Sonate n.3 op58
0:44 Schumann Sonate n.1 op.11
1:42 Chopin Barcarolle en Fa dièse majeur op.60
and then i stoped timestamping because i realized it's not the same pieces that are played on the playel :(
I would take the Erard. This surprises me because I've always coveted Pleyel. In this presentation, at least, I would have to grant the Erard as the more robust of the two instruments. The lack of robust playing was a consistent if gentle criticism of the great master Chopin. Maybe it was more due to the piano he chose.
Dovrebbero essercene uno in ogni città restauratori di questi magnifici strumenti. Io li AMO!
Turi de Marco de' Eustachijs sarebbe magnifico possedere un pianoforte d’epoca
How i would love to own a pleyel like this one, for playing Chopin!
I dont know whether they are (too) loud or not, they sound beautifull in this recording with my headphones on😊, very intimate and clear at the same time
Interesting, other Playels I've been listening to of a similar vintage didn't sound as sweet as this one and didn't have much sustain in their treble. Maybe it is the recording quality. Thank you for presenting this. Enjoyed both pianos.
I really have to agree here. Pleyels are known for having very little harmonic resonance, to really prevent the mush and resonance of other pitches we hear on modern pianos when playing a chord, this seems to be quite the opposite.
The Erard sounds magnificent. I think the Pleyel might be slightly out of turn?
the pleyel.:)..
That Erard sounds gorgeous! A little too much compression on some of the louder parts of the recording but still ❤
This video is about comparison between two 19th century pianos builded the same year. Therefore, same pieces should have been played on each piano. Is the best way to compare.
Beautiful--preferable in many ways for this repertoire. COuld I ask what tuning(s) was used?
This demonstrates why Chopin emphasized so much on legato playing. Every failed legato can be heard and it makes a huge difference here compared to a Steinway, where a simple pedal with a bit of reverb from the sound board can 'fake' a legato. You can tell the potential of the instrument, but doesn't sound right when poorly executed.
I thought the playing was with too much pedal on both pianos. I would love to hear a more spare version
ahhhh, at 3:02 i heard the sound that is Chopin.....
I had the mixed 'pleasure' of playing both Erard and Pleyel in a recorded public recital....
Muy interesante este vídeo. Presenta dos conceptos de sonido muy diferentes, por un lado Erard es mas brillante y limpio su sonido, sin embargo Pleyel tiene un sonido mas intimo y lleno de color. Yo personalmente prefiero el Pleyel. Gracias por vuestro vídeo nos permite conocer los planteamientos sonoros de cada constructor. Un saludo
Estoy completamente de acuerdo. Sin embargo me gusta mucho más la romántica vehemencia del Erard.
I like the tone of the Pleyel much better than the Erard!
Anyone noticed that the erard iz tuned in A432 and not in A 440
Personally i like the most A 432 tuning
It gives an all different colour and resonance to the music, also tones are a little darker in the base and for a big concert hall that s the best
Well, surely that completely invalidates the comparison.
Sounds like a horrible tuning job to my ears
So you have perfect pitch? Because it doesn't mean everyone has it :'(
Yes understand why Chopin choose Pleyel. For me Erard is closer or just nice change because Mendelssohn sounds great on it
The Pleyel is almost like bells. It sounds like it has a moderator stop
I like the pleyel
What is the reason for the different sound? A short explanation would be nice and informing. It lies within the construction, doesn't it? But what exactly?
i love Erard
I can totally understand why Chopin preferred the Pleyel.
Definitely prefer Erard.
That was Berceuce not a nocturne on the Pleyel.
But I fall in love with both instruments instantly - I know criticisms - I read critics below, and they have a point or two. However! These are restored instruments, so we can only say "these instruments are *near* the sound experience of the 1840'ies. (Soundboards change, strings produced today are different.)
My most serious doubt is that the Pleyel in the soprano range has an umistakably ring of museum-clavier, I am not sure why this is the case with most old instruments, but my guess is that the string-material and the crown of the soundboard are gone wrong.
Its totally possible to have the exactly same sound of a period piano back to today's. Strings are different, but there are customers making them exactly as they should to be. So yes, we're hearing exactly the same thing Chopin, Schumann, Liszt and others knew as a top-quality piano. And that's amazing!
Also, piano hammers of today aren't the same either. I have a Bechstein 1886 upright and its got softer hammer felts and less thicker strings, but the building is already modern. Stunning sound, still needs a little voicing but I tune it myself and I simply love it. Things got "the same" during 1950's, pianos of the XIX century are each one a piece of jewel, they're so full of character and the touch is lighter than what we're used to play(due to thicker strings, felts also got dense, hammers got heavier and it directly affects the sound to achieve more volume, most times sacrificing tone quality on smaller pianos).
the first piece played on the pleyel is the chopin berceuse, not the nocturne 27-2
Que pena que francia ya no fabrica mas pianos, magnificos instrumentos sin duda. Una lastima.
i don't care..i just love your playing..... love it love it
It is not Norcturne of Chopin in the 3:04. It is a Berceuse by Chopin
7옥타브
펠트천으로 해머를 감싸 음색이 더욱 부드러워짐
적어도 2개의 페달 장착
(서스테이닝 페달, 우나 코르다 페달)
#. 세바스티앙 에라르의 이중이탈구조 피아노
건반을 누른 뒤, 건반이 완전히 돌아오지 않아도 다음 타현이 가능한 구조이다.
(연주 테크닉이 더욱 화려해질 수 있게됨)
Thanks for this video - well recorded sound, played by excellent pianist. Beatiful belcanto feeling (voicing, legato, breathing), original text (in Lento con gran espressione bass f sharp instead Paderewski F sharp) etc. Who is playing? There are so many less known pianists better quality than "big stars". Piano I preffer Pleyel. Erard have more of "earth" and less of "heaven" in comparison. But better comparison would be live without microphones.
Song in 3:03 is not nocturne op.27 no.2
It's berceuse Op.57
PLEYEL, SEMPRE, FOREVER!!
please compare the same piece.
I prefer the Pleyel
Can you tell me how much will cost an ederd like this un perfect condition?more or less?thanks
Definitely a Pleyel dude here. That would be my piano of choice. The treble is similar to my unrestored square grand piano. I really wish the player would stop using the una chorda pedal so we could hear the full body of the piano. Sorry to say this, but a pianist should be able to play ‘piano’ and ‘forte’.
I wonder how much Maestro Commellato demanded for the performance?
Of course Pleyel sounds far better as Erard. But it's seems to me both instruments are still dead. Whether the micros were ill placed and/or the temperament was tuned to equal one but the resonance is missing wich would give real life and colors to the pianos.
Can you please tell me wich temperament is used?
I appreciate the comparison, but there is FAR too much echo in this room to get a feel of what they each sound like. Both sound like a muddy mess to me with all that room reflection.
I prefer the sound of the Erard.... the Pleyel sounds muted...Ive heard that Chopin's piano had narrower keys... The one here is standard..
what was involved in the restoration work of these pianos? was the original soundboard preserved?
We found it in quite conditions. The soundboard is the original one and the instrument has been restringed with appropriate strings (talking about material and diameters). We had to work on the mechanic and the felts had been refelted with historical felts.
I think today's pianos are all too loud and powerful.
Absolutely
thats kind of the point of a concert piano
And much less lyrical. Generally too bright of a sound
They have a greater dynamic range, though.
I’m sure Chopin would love playing a modern piano.
Did you use the same hammers for both pianos? Or did you have to use 2 different types of hammers?
Hello, why couldn't you Try Remaking A Daddy Grand Piano by putting on 88 Tuning Forks like what you did on an Upright Piano, Please do the Same Thing on a Daddy Grand Piano For Most of us CZcamsrs, It will be a much Better Idea For us so we can Try and See and Hear It BIZZI Strumenti Storici A Tastiera Thank You.
Dear Cannadine, my apologies but I believe to have not properly understood your question. Could you be so kind to clarify?
3:04...That was Chopin's Berceuse Op. 57 and not a nocturne
The comparison test wasn't done properly. Identical shorter passages played on each piano would have would have been far more beneficial to the listeners. This video was a great idea but it seems that no serious thought was put into achieving the actual comparison objective for anyone other than the pianist who gets to touch the instruments.
Comparing The Two Historical French Made Grand Pianos