[pianotech] Gen-u-whine Steinway parts:OT RANT

[Encore Pianos]

Not really, this subject could turn into War and Peace, couldn't it?  J
But, fair enough.  I think the gist of my question was if you were moving
back towards Original Principles (whatever they are!) ala Steinway in your
work.  But I take you to mean here that the design of a piano is a complex,
interactive system where making changes in one place can sometimes have
unintended consequences in others, so one must always be mindful.  

 

I can't help but think that the factory drifted away from ways of executing
procedures that resulted in very consistent, high quality work, having
forgotten why they had established those protocols in the first place.  The
20's was likely a time when the factory had worked hard to evolve these
standards and really had their shit together.  Rebuilding those pianos
seemed easier to get a pleasing result in my experience, because so many
things were set up well originally.  Steinways from the 1940's on are quite
a different animal in these respects.

 

I have noticed that it is taking place in two different places.  The fact
that we have two lists has diminished the vitality of the discussion, and
the number of people participating.  A couple of years ago, some incredibly
interesting threads would get going that would continue for a long time.   A
number of highly knowledgeable people would engage at great depth.
Incredibly interesting and educational.  Blew the journal out of the water
in what it could give anyone who was interested.  Those discussions are,
with rare exception, for the most part gone.  That's sad, and completely
lost to those who have made the changes to Pianotech and who will make the
decisions for the future.   They don't look at it deeply enough to know the
difference, because they don't participate in the process.  Ah, the Peter
Principle.    

 

Will   

 

From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf
Of David Love
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 1:14 PM
To: pianotech at ptg.org
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Gen-u-whine Steinway parts:OT RANT

 

I have to some degree in several previous conversations including in the
discussion recently published in the PTJ on tone.  It's a loaded subject and
I don't want to delve too deeply into it at the moment.  For now, I hope it
will suffice to say that I think one needs to approach design changes with
caution.  BTW that goes for Steinway too.  I don't think all the changes
they've made over the decades have been a benefit and often (at least from
my view) seem to have been done in isolation without looking at the whole
picture.   If the 1920's pianos were the design and execution pinnacle for
them (as some believe) then they've gravitated away from that but piecemeal,
not with a total concept in mind but just with certain individual changes.
They haven't always been integrated well and haven't always made sense.
Separating the design intention from the execution is difficult at times but
we ultimately have to take them at their word.  What the produce(d) is(was)
what they intended.  

 

Cryptic enough?

 

btw, on an unrelated topic, have you noticed how this discussion is taking
place in two different places, the new list and the old list?  Many who read
only one or the other are getting only half the discussion.  What a mess.  

 

 

David Love

www.davidlovepianos.com

 

From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf
Of Encore Pianos
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 9:19 AM
To: pianotech at ptg.org
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Gen-u-whine Steinway parts:OT RANT

 

"The more pianos I rebuild (bellies and actions) and the more I have been
involved with design changes, the more I gravitate back to the original
concept (with tweaks of course)."  

 

Would you care to elaborate on this a bit more?

 

Will Truitt

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20120502/72148cf9/attachment.htm>