evolution

[Horace Greeley]

Stephen,

At 10:16 AM 3/23/98 -0500, you wrote:
>Richard wrote:
>> The key word is EVOLUTION.  First class piano makers are trying to make
>> their instruments better.  That is the number one reason pianos are no
>> longer made like they were for Beethoven, Schubert, Chopin.    
>> 
>Evolution, yes. Better, no.  The mistake is the ubiquitous modern 
>misunderstanding of what evolution means. Modern pianos are just 
>different from historical pianos. They are adapted in response to their 
>environment. Musical requirements changed, the pianos changed to match. 
>This is the essence of Darwinian evolution. Not betterment in any sense 
>of the word. Pianos are not made the way they were in 1810 (present 
>company excepted) precisely because such an instrument would not meet the 
>requirements of the late 20th Century consumer/pianist.

I respectfully concur in part and demurr in part.

While there is clearly support for your position as to the late 20th Cent.,
there is little, if any, for such a position as to the earlier (read
pre-1890-or-so) design and construction of the piano.  The public and
private literature of the times continually speaks of the myraid of
inadequacies of contemporaneous instruments.

In short, the development of the piano was driven in a direction which 
reached, from a certain point of view, it's zenith in the third quarter
of the 19th Cent. precisely and specifically because of the musical
considerations of "betterment" (and, lest we forget, profit for the
manufacturer). 

While this may, or may not, be an adequate representation of your position,
these arguments seem most often to be stated in terms which ignore the facts
that the composers and performers of the period (1810, whatever)were so
constantly displeased with the instruments on and with which they had to work.
The evolution of the piano through the 19th Cent. reflects the active
collaboration of engineers, composers, performers, manufacturers and
theoreticians.

The basic question, which seems to be whether or not a given instrument
is "better" than another for thus and so a situation is, then, essentially
Cartesian, and, at a certain level, specious.  Reality is a matter of 
perception.

What we have gained, in terms of power, stability, longevity (?), and
reliability, among others, has cost us as musicians much that is, from
a certain point of view, just as important - flexibility, purity of
tone, and ease of manipulation.  As in all else in life, it is a question
of what sets of compromises is one willing and able to make.

>> The process of evolution goes on. Where do we want to go from here?
>>
>What is happening now is stagnation. The modern piano is no longer 
>evolving. And we are all aware of the potential consequences for the 
>industry that are looming on the horizon. 

Ascending further up the steps of Parnassus, it is to me as if we,
particularly as a subset-profession, often lose sight of the fact
that we are, at best, curators in a museum. 

I disagree with the position that the piano is no longer evolving.
The changes in concepts tone and response introduced in the last
30 years make this point more eloquently than I possibly can.
Pianos are made faster and cheaper, with less attention to detail
and usability.  Tone production simply does not have the range 
and domain of former years.  The same is true of actions.  As
technicians, we are more and more forced to deal with issues
which have nothing to do with music; e.g. Does it really matter
what temperament is used if the piano is out of tune before
intermission and the voicing is obviously poor?

Then there is the influence of the recording industry...

Oh, well.

Back to what passes for reality, and no, Bill, I wouldn't think of
using that Viotti temperament for Beethoven 5, Marpurg I is a much
more appropriate choice.  Further (just to keep things really
rolling), the instrument is tuned to 444, with the top streched to
beat the band (literally), and the bass almost-but-not-quite
collapsed for the same reason.  (Beethoven uses way too much
first inversion writing to trust an orchestra that plays _really_
wide thirds.)

Best to all.

Horace