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.

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.

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!

Great comment. :)

Chopin played on a pleyel so you're right with that one

Chopin played on pleyel and Liszt played on Erard

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! :)

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.

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...

For true comparison, the same pieces should have been played. Different pieces cause different sounds.

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.

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.

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

Turi de Marco de' Eustachijs sarebbe magnifico possedere un pianoforte d’epoca

From what I read, Liszt wasn't impressed with the Pleyel pianos. He purportedly called them "pianinos".

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

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.

Rach is over notes, senseless garbage. Nothing but bang bang bang and no musical value.

Solid Snake Oooooh I couldn’t possibly disagree more.

By now I have heard Chopin played dozens if not hundreds of times on modern pianos by different artists. Hearing these antique pianos, I feel that I would prefer to only hear these tunes on the antiques. But I wonder if I had grown up hearing only the antique pianos, that I today might prefer hearing the modern piano.

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.

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.

Hammers of this time did not have the same weight as todays .

Erard is pretty normal, Pleyel was among the heaviest actions, double as heavy as Bosendorfer and about 1/3 heavier than the Erard. Now, if there is some friction in the old action of those 2 pianos, this would make them a bit heavier.

Estoy completamente de acuerdo. Sin embargo me gusta mucho más la romántica vehemencia del Erard.

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.

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 :'(

Nothing is wrong with it. It is designed to do that to get different colors of sound.