Delwin D Fandrich wrote: > >> but if a piano has lasted 100 > > >years sounding good with a less than perfectly shaped bridge, I > > >reckon it deserves to carry on for another 100 or so without losing > > >its defects of character. > > Depends on whether or not those defects of character are audibly offensive > to the musician. If they are I see no reason for it to carry on for another > 100 years offending the very folks it's supposed to be pleasing when a new > bridge(s) and some revised scaling can solve most of the problem. > > Del Hmmm... I wonder just who "the musician" refered to could be. Personally I find it almost incredible to think that I could not find some quite proficient musician to swear by just about any piano. Gotta admit Del, this line above seems somewhat in contrast with the stuff you recently exchanged with me on the Petrof thread. Heck... lots of folks think the Steinway O is a horribly scaled piano... and by some standards perhaps this is so... but then there are folks who just love this S&S model. Ron O mentioned a bit earlier on this thread about not putting one particular age in piano building up against the other... I agree wholeheartedly. Each period had / has its share of thinkers and a multitude of ideas... sometimes opposing ones as well. btw... just got the 1836 Broadwood square given to the university for restoration and eventual use by the baroque department at the school.... this old guy is definatly going to be loved and enjoyed by many musicians... they are all excited about it... sounds like fun to me. -- Richard Brekne RPT, N.P.T.F. Bergen, Norway mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC