Grotrian 275 grand

[Bdshull@AOL.COM]

Ken:

I will share my ramblings about 275's.  I service two - a 1971 and a 1974.  
The 1974 was in our recital hall at the University of Redlands for years.   
The first I saw this piano was in 1984.  The school asked me to evaluate it 
and come up with reasons for its tonal deterioration.  At the time I believed 
that the hammers were hard and inflexible and recommended replacement. The 
action and stringing seemed fine except the high agraffe area which was 
"dead" - no color or volume (a dramatic difference from the adjacent duplex 
section).   However, others (including my predecessor at that school), 
suggested to me that the board had lost some crown and the impedance had 
changed.

It was most dramatic when an artist performed the incredible Scriabin etude 
(forgot the key signature and opus # - it has a repeated forte bass figure 
and a melody in octaves in the middle of the piano which must be heard over 
the ostinato - he could not bring the bass down enough for the middle to be 
heard - this was not a voicing problem, but a piano problem....The only 275's 
which I have seen all have this weak middle;  the 225 I service does not, and 
is an incredible piano across the entire scale.

Ron Overs rebuilt/rescaled a 275 and has a lot to say about it - he sent me 
an extensive e-mail about it which he may have on hand - might even have a 
jpeg or two.   He ran into problems with failed glue joints at the soundboard 
and ribs/rim - I wonder if that is because of the Australian climate (I don't 
know if it is more extreme where he is than here in Southern California).  He 
also reworked agraffes and did a host of other things.

The Grotrian is a performance piano, and if heavily performed on regularly 
should get the routine rebuilding work expected of such an animal (which my 
school will not do yet, although I am still trying...)  I am suspicious of 
the string at the agraffe - whether restringing, or restringing and 
reworking/replacing agraffes (the agraffes have the steel posts inserted).    
I am also suspicious of the soundboard;  its best years may have been the 
first 10 years, with a well-crowned board which was well loaded; 10 years of 
humidity cycles may have cut well into the power of the instrument.

Ron is very happy with his 275 - but he essentially "remanufactured" it.  I 
asked Klaus Fenner about the 275 in the 80's and he said that his main 
problem with it is the long string wastelength in front of the agraffe in the 
mid-treble;  tuning stability seemed more important than tonal loss, as I 
remember our conversation.  But I believe that that upper agraffe area 
suffers tonal loss and creating more angle with brass half-round set close to 
the agraffes would help.  I believe Ron did this on his 275.

I have never believed the 275 was a good concerto piano - don't know enough 
about the 277 to say.  But I am curious whether Ron Overs has had his 
reworked 275 in a large hall with orchestra.  Like Newton said about hammers 
- we might be surprised. I hope someone who has had success in a large hall 
with a 275 might post on this.

I think the tinny/mellow model is a little simplistic;  If the piano is in 
excellent condition and well-built, it should - to a considerable extent - 
take various voicing approaches with various results depending on the 
client's preferences.  The problem with the Grotrians (yours and mine, 
specifically) is that they are no longer in excellent condition, and driving 
them causes them to sound too bright, metallic, percussive, whatever.    If 
they were in better shape they might give a lot more without the attack 
problems.

Bill Shull
University of Redlands, La Sierra University
Loma Linda, CA