Historical pianos, from Germany to England.

[Richard Moody]

----- Original Message -----
From: Clark <caccola@net1plus.com>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 5:46 AM
Subject: Re: pianotech-digest V2000 #292--New Publication


ric,

>Koster frequently misidentifies wood species in "Keyboard Instruments";
>the book remains valuable as a monument to the BMFA collection,

>From Koster's topical section, (Poletti, p83):

>and the lack of historical sources
>linking any British maker with Silbermann, can be taken as allowing the
>possibility that the English design stemmed from pianos made by the
>Italian or Iberian followers of Bartolomeo Cristofori. (quoted from Koster,
John. "The Divided Bridge", JAMIS vXXII, 1997)

Assuming the final sentence means 'independent of Silbermann', your
posts suggest that you, too, would disagree with Koster.

Regards,
Clark


Yes this is a questionable assertion.   I would rather ask him
about it, before disagreeing.  Disagreeing is one thing you can always put
off until tomorrow.  If you disagree with your history professor you need
lots of wiggle room, or I always did.  I would extend that same regard to
John Koster.
    I know that Dolge says students of Silbermann went to England and set up
shop. Zumpe and Backers are mentioned. Dolge doesn't say what his sources
are. (He does mention Brinsmead elsewhere)  Never-the-less I have not heard
Dolge refuted. Another source talks about "the 12 apostles"  refering to
students of Silbermann many of whom went to London.  Maybe he wants to show
that the early English makers shunned, or kept apart from the Germen
emigres.   It seems he wants to introduce the possibility of influence of
"Italian or Iberian followers of
Cristorfori.  And there is the conondrum of why there is no direct link from
Christofori himself to other makers.   It seems that Christofori and
Silbermann never met.  "Christofori died in 1731.  As far as we can learn he
left no pupils, unless we so consider Silbermann." (Dolge) Yet if Dolge is
correct, how can the influence of the pupils of Silbermann making pianos in
England not be a link to
Silbermann?  On the other hand if there were Italian and Iberian followers
of Cristofori we have never heard of, that would be interesting  reading.
    One thing to remember,  a publication in a scholarly journal is subject
to peer
review, and such review is expected. Here the theses, and propositions are a
"little more radical" than for a formal book.  There is a process of
"weeding out" so to speak some "different possibilities"  But they must be
presented if they are to be scrutinized.  This is good and this is what we
are doing.
    Regarding the identification, or mis-identification of wood species.
This is sometimes good to  take with a grain of salt. There is disagreement
even among botanists.
I know what piss oak is because that is what I  heard an old woodsman call
it.
Whether you call it red oak in Arkansas, or another calls it black oak in
South Carolina or someone else  calls it live oak in California,  it will
always be piss oak to me.  Look at all the names for lumber that come from
the "spruce pine". One might be hard put to decide if a SB is Norwegian
pine, or Tyrolean spruce. Or is it the other way around?   It seems there is
always some contention as to exactly what species of wood was used.  This is
not helped by the different names from region to region, country to country,
hemisphere to hemisphere for the same piece of wood and the tree it came
from.   ---ric