Fred: The Steinbuhler action for a Steinway D can be adapted to fit in any Steinway D. The one we have has been in many different pianos from Chicago to Houston. An artist has but to purchase one and then take it with them. Actually the switching back and forth has been less of a problem for the people who use the 7/8 but when they play on a full action they do have to forgo some of the reparatory that they play on the 7/8 for the simple reason that they can't play it on the standard action. Our teacher who uses a 7/8 plays on standard keyboard also, she just has to leave off some Rachmaninoff that plays on the 7/8. dp ____________________ David M. Porritt, RPT dporritt at smu.edu -----Original Message----- From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Fred Sturm Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2008 5:52 PM To: College and University Technicians Subject: Re: [CAUT] Natural key width On Jan 25, 2008, at 1:21 PM, Ron Overs wrote: > However, I do still believe that an unoccupied niche in the world > of pianos is that no manufacturer currently offers a smaller > keyboard as an option. Amen to that! Although in performance, the problem is that concert halls have what they have, so the pianist has to adapt. It would be pretty hard to base a career on demanding a special instrument unless you were a very remarkable performer. Speaking as a pianist, even 2 mm less for an octave would be welcome (more or less what you get going from the 1230 to the 1218). Better yet would be around 5mm less per octave, which would be near 7 mm for a 10th, and that would make it a _lot_ less precarious to try to play one without rolling using my fairly average-sized hands. Going from the 1218 to the 1230+ is disconcerting and troublesome when playing pieces that involve such stretches. The number of large-handed pianists is tiny compared with average to small-handed, especially in this day of oriental women as the average serious piano student. But what are the odds of getting S&S to go a bit smaller in our lifetimes? Actually, probably better odds today than ever, as they are very open to outside feedback the past few years. But still a rather difficult nut to crack. I suppose if someone catered in that direction with enough budget, it would be possible to gain wide acceptance over time. I think the 15/16 is perhaps a more reasonable size than 7/8s, in terms of being able to adapt back and forth. It comes to a bit more than 10 mm per octave smaller. 7/8 is over 20 mm per octave different. Regards, Fred Sturm University of New Mexico fssturm at unm.edu
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC