Posted 28 March 2007 - 03:27 PM
OK, I have heard the tape in full and this is my opinion.
It's a collation assembled over time, possibly using different machines, certainly in different places, so the acoustics change markedly, which makes it a pig to compare. It starts off with a couple of straight knockabout practice pieces, warts and all and settles down later. It is all one player and differences are due to changed recording situations and tune variety. It's a tape done for fun by the player himself.
Most of it is using a big duet; 71, 81 key; the bass notes go too deep for anything less, but the 'busked folk' numbers don't use this range; well you wouldn't really, but there may be a smaller box used for these; I think I detect a different instrument through the haze. (wood ended if you really want a guess, but it's getting desperately tenuous)
The treatments at points where you can compare like for like seem very consistent to me; the 'fist' of the player with ever so slightly ragged timing (a small hand on a wide Maccan keyboard?); the bass work, expression, staccato handling. Fortunately there are several of the showier pieces that include both solemn and brisk sections which permit the linking of the two styles that the tape largely falls into, and they are the key to this.
Circumstantial evidence includes the music choice. As mentioned above I feel that a lot of them are similar to others suggesting one person's preferences (although I suppose that could be the taper rather than the player).
There, that's my tuppenceworth.