Hammer Types

[David Love]

Confrontation, no, impatience, yes.  I get your point--it's hard not to, you
keep making it over and over again and you continue to mischaracterize
others' comments.  Given the popularity of Yamaha pianos in particular, and
loud and percussive pianos in general, it is arguable that many pianists are
not interested in a true pianissimo.  That's not a value judgment, it
doesn't require a huge leap of faith, it's a reasonable assumption based on
consumer behavior.  

It's an old and tiring discussion with you making claims about what is or
isn't possible without hearing the pianos in question.  Your own bias is in
evidence but you don't need to defend it.  There's nothing particularly
wrong with your choice though I may not share your taste.  But it's not the
only choice.  For things to progress you have to periodically question
assumptions.  It may seem counterintuitive that a soft hammer can be bright,
pack some punch and power and still offer a wide range of dynamic range
without having to resort to the una corda pedal to get something resembling
a true pianissimo (not what the pedal was designed for, in my view).  But
unless you are willing to entertain the idea as a possibility, you won't
recognize it even if you do hear it.          

David Love
davidlovepianos at comcast.net 
www.davidlovepianos.com

-----Original Message-----
From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf
Of Ric Brekne
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 1:33 PM
To: pianotech at ptg.org
Subject: Hammer Types

Hi Dave...

I see you are off on a confrontational road again.  I simply reacted to 
Dels comments which seemed to define a whole group of pianists as not 
having any use for pianisimo level of play.  What is or isnt pianisimo 
level is clearly (in the context of the discussion) in the realm of the 
subjective.  It would be just as useless for some pianist to accuse the 
very low levels of soft play as being too soft.

Since reacting to what appeared to me as a sweeping generalization was 
the thrust of my post... in favour of being aware of the subjective 
nature of these issues... I really dont see where on earth you are 
comming from.   I'm gonna toss this one back at you and ask for a little 
less over defensivness.  Your closing paragraph accuses me of exactly 
that which I reacted against.... so obviously you missed my point entirely.

I'll let you have the last word on the matter if you wish... as I'm not 
really into this mode of discussion at all.

Cheers
RicB


I think you need to get over ascribing statements about universal truths to
those who claim a preference simply because they may not agree with your
own.  Choosing a piano to build or play, or a tonal concept to develop is
just about that: choice.  There are many choices out there (most of them on
the louder, more percussive, bigger bangier side) and trying to fit every
piano into a single box or compare every piano on the same terms is simply a
mistake.  High tension and low tension scales demand different soundboard
performance, require different hammers and produce different types of tone.
Unless you've heard a piano such as the one below and can determine for
yourself whether a soft hammer is capable of producing both power and
brilliance as well as the ability to play down to a whisper or produce a
better timbral balance on a particular design, I would be reluctant to make
claims about what can or can't be done based on your belief rather than
experience or knowledge.  

That you have a personal philosophy about tone is certainly within your
right.  And if you prefer, you can try and fit every piano you come across
into that little box whether the piano belongs there or not.  But I would be
cautious about allowing philosophy to become ideology and with it the need
to provide all the answers without first understanding the questions.  

David Love
davidlovepianos at comcast.net
www.davidlovepianos.com