Pianoteq is amazing with a good controller like a big Kawai VPC1 or the fanciest Fatar action in the Studiologic "GT" models. It is very responsive. I've been using it for over a decade and the sound keeps improving.
The combination of pianoteq and a sample based piano is pretty nice too, though tough to do on a Pi.
Good speakers improve the experience because you get your room resonance etc.
The coolest thing - you can change temperament. So if you are playing music from before equal temperament, you can hear what different keys used to sound like! Very interesting especially with Bach.
I agree with your son, there is nothing like a real piano. There are interesting attempts at combining the digital and mechanical with soundboard transducers from Kawai and Yamaha, I haven't used them but I would like to.
first: I have done this test myself many times in various ways, including recreating albums as a mix of 16bit FLAC and v0 MP3 (track by track, not within tracks), putting them on, and listening on speakers. I can tell sometimes, but the v0 still sounds great.
I was able to distinguish the 3 rock recordings with confidence, high frequency transients sounded more impactful in WAV. The Queensryche in particular has a lot of (well applied!) dynamic compression on the acoustic guitar and vocal which really brings out those transients.
However, if I heard the MP3 in isolation I would not detect anything was off. They all sounded good.
The Morricone and Vangelis I had no conviction either way and I guessed wrong both times. I suspect in their recording/mixing/mastering a lot of high frequency sound was lost anyway. In either case, I don't know if the CD master was made from original tapes or not. I know the Blade Runner OST has had a convoluted release history. Morricone has a 2004 CD master which is pretty well liked.
"Moving Pictures" was recorded to tape, but was notably an early digitally mastered album. Maybe that has resulted in preserved high frequency sound.
Compressed audio is great, I love it and I use it a lot.
I use CD Quality for archival purposes and my home library.. for most of the past decade hard disks have been inexpensive. I convert to Opus 192 for mobile devices.
Another reason for CD Quality archiving - I have a long term idea of recreating a CD collection. I want to get printable CDs and burn the audio/print the art because I want my children to have the experience of going thru a shelf or flipping through a binder, putting the disk in the tray, pressing play. I always loved doing that.
Again, could I tell if I transcoded a well encoded mp3 back to redbook? Maybe not consistently, but it's more likely the transcode of mp3 -> CD would introduce more audible problems than the encoding of WAV -> mp3.
The core repertoire hasn't really changed but the boundaries get further and further out. It's like "classical" music. Pianists must learn the 2 part inventions, they're an essential part of the tradition.
Big band is hard to learn from. The large ensembles like Basie's and Duke's have persisted in popularity, but classic "big band" are very much of their time.
The bebop guys will always occupy the position in jazz that Bach occupies in "classical". They're foundational musicians in a continuous tradition and one learns a lot about the music by studying them.
By "canon" do you mean respected musicians? Or do you mean that PLUS players whose work is considered essential to learning how to play the music? The answers will be different. Keith Jarrett is great and esteemed but unless you want to sound like Keith Jarrett, he's not essential to study.
Brubeck suffered a serious spinal injury swimming in Hawaii which resulted in chronic hand pain, depriving him of some dexterity. He may have been a fluent and swinging improviser before that, I don't know. It all worked out, his quartet had a unique style and Desmond was such a great player and improviser.
This is very dismissive of The Beatles. I agree there isn't much sonic similarity to them anymore in charting music, though there is a lot of great new music released that is heavily in their debt. Tame Impala (up until the latest album) is probably the most recent big artist to wear an obvious Beatles influence.
the examples of LZ and Ozzy -
"She Loves You" moved Ozzy to start a band. Sabbath sounds nothing like The Beatles, but inspiration doesn't require a similar sound.
This is more of a fun story than an inspiration - The Beatles inspired Graham Gouldman (later of 10cc) to write "For Your Love", which he then gave to The Yardbirds. Eric Clapton didn't like it, and left The Yardbirds and joined The Bluesbreakers, and then founded Cream. Jeff Beck replaced him, and was later joined by a London studio musician named.. Jimmy Page and The Yardbirds becamae The New Yardbirds and then Led Zeppelin. So, Zeppelin may never have existed if not for The Beatles. In general, they blew the doors open for all the British bands to have success here.
The Beatles' influence on how contemporary music sounds has waned, you're right about that - it's certainly favored an electronic direction. The early/mid 90s were the last period where they really loomed large, as the grunge, neo-psychedelia, and britpop bands loved the Beatles. To me, Nirvana and Soundgarden sound nothing like The Beatles but they both claim to have composed songs trying to imitate The Beatles. It's not always obvious to us as listeners.
Their influence on how music is made in a studio is indelible, though. They were relentless in experimentation. Their requests forced George Martin to realize his brilliance as a producer. George Martin didn't invent the recording techniques - Geoff Emerick and Ken Townshend did (couple of example - close miking bowed instruments, automatic double tracking, both of which immediately became commonplace).
They also remain influential on the concept of a band. They had total creative control and they wielded it, as Marvin Gaye, Stevie Wonder and Prince and others later did. Gordy probably doesn't let Marvin do "What's Goin On" if the era the Beatles ushered in didn't threaten Motown so much.
The Beatles were a cultural and social phenomenon in addition to a musical one. They had a lot of gravity.
None of this is to argue that Kraftwerk are anything but titans. I love Kraftwerk. Much of my favorite music is the result of the Beatles' and Kraftwerk's combined influence. "Souvenir" by OMD is an example - that has both influences all over it. Since you are immersed in and create electronic music you feel Krafterk's influence more. Instrumentalists and singers probably feel more Beatles influence.
last point - I watched Blade Runner in 2019. I loved it, but it just felt like a good sci fi movie. It didn't feel important or innovative, because every sci fi movie since Blade Runner bears its influence.
We can't imagine hearing Revolver in 1966, or something as indulgent as Sgt Pepper just a year later (along with all the Magical Mystery Tour songs). It doesn't sound revolutionary anymore, but at the time, it was.
The combination of pianoteq and a sample based piano is pretty nice too, though tough to do on a Pi.
Good speakers improve the experience because you get your room resonance etc.
The coolest thing - you can change temperament. So if you are playing music from before equal temperament, you can hear what different keys used to sound like! Very interesting especially with Bach.
I agree with your son, there is nothing like a real piano. There are interesting attempts at combining the digital and mechanical with soundboard transducers from Kawai and Yamaha, I haven't used them but I would like to.