Re: digitals > I know nothing about editing or midi files and all of those other gimmicks used to "fix" some recordings. I would probably be tempted to "cheat" if I knew how to. But I'm just an old fart who enjoys the old-fashioned acoustical pianos. Hi John, I agree with your considerations: 1) in absolute, theorical better condition, tha acustical are the best. 2) often, in the concrete life, a good digital permit to work (practise, playing and recording) with some advantages. > I do hope that those members who edit out wrong notes, or change the tempo, and such using electronic tools are honest enough to divulge that information. And this is a good question. My recording technique: from audio out of the piano directly to the PC. I use "Total recorder" software to help myself (no problem to admit): I record different versions of not less than 2 minutes parts of music of a piece (or the music there is on two pages, my problem is that I play seeing the score), then I choice the preferred and paste them. Some examples: one Scarlatti sonata with 2 "takes", my Polonaise.Fantaisie are 4 "takes", shorter pieces with an unique "take". My idea is that my recordings must be an image of my pianism: in a very relaxed and happy moment, in a moment choosen by me, but an image of my pianism. I do not use other editing skills, but I have a good opinion of the ones (the best IMHO: John Lewis Grant. A rare example of MIDI pianism that sounds less MIDI than many celebated pianists) which use a decleared, strong MIDI editing, if they research (and it is the Grant's case) a creative and "human" way to control the parameters of an interpretation. But it is not my way: I prefer this softer (but very useful if I will to play and to record an high number of the pieces I love) kind of editing. All best, Sandro. P.S. Excellent your Brahms, IMHO.