Hey guys, honest question:
I put some effort into a piano piece that I recorded on a real piano — almost 100 years old, from Germany, as seen in the thumbnail — which I really enjoy playing and whose sound I deeply appreciate, at least when I'm at the keys. Now I’m wondering: is it actually worth it?

One special thing about this recording is that I played it in a single take, with no editing. That took a fair bit of time, even though the piece itself isn’t that difficult to play. So overall, the process was quite different from producing music on the computer, which is what I usually do:

For comparison, here are some alternative versions of the same piece where the piano parts were done using sample libraries (you can ignore the other instruments for now):

I think the library pianos sound pretty decent too. So the question is:
Does the real recording add something the samples just can’t deliver? Or is it simply unnecessary effort?

 

First off, I think that's a very nice piece you've written...kudos!

For me, playing a real instrument is always my first stop on the road to creating a song. As a multi-instrumentalist my artistic leaning is to capture the performance honestly in the room that it is recorded in. If I wish a Native American flute in a song I'll pick my flute, choose the mic and placement so that it resides in a place in the mix that I have in mind. I wouldn't use a sampled flute unless it fulfilled a special need. For instance, if I had a piano at home I would use that piano and not a library. In the case of the piece that you are showcasing I think that any of the pianos that you have recorded with sound wonderful. If you wished the mic'd recording to be less warm you could always us a good eq to highlight those frequencies that fit the bill and dimish those that don't. Though like I said before, I myself would always look first to the wood, brass or tin route.