[pianotech] 102 keys and 4 pedals???

[Ron Nossaman]

On 11/4/2012 6:28 AM, Encore Pianos wrote:
> Terry, I find your comment most interesting.  I have not heard the
> Stuart in person but have listened to recordings of it on CD as well as
> recordings off their website.  I suspect that what Terry hears is a
> deficit with this design – it gets “overloaded” (if you will) on more
> powerful playing.  I don’t believe that this  comes from the board but
> rather the insecurity of the termination.  I have listened to many
> recordings off the website, which are typically played at lower volume
> levels and can be lovely.  But push it a bit and zingy overtones rear
> their ugly head – I think I have been hearing what Terry is talking
> about in his comments below.

When I got the chance to go to Australia a few years back (I WANT it!), 
I got to spend time on and under two of these pianos. What Terry 
describes is a classic over driven soundboard. The pianos I saw both did 
the same thing on anything above moderate attack levels. They were each 
one full compass killer octave, which impressed me. I wouldn't have 
thought that possible until I heard it for myself. Crawling underneath 
and looking around, the workmanship is as good as there is. The rim is 
hugely massive, and the soundboard assembly is the flimsiest I've ever 
seen by far. Underneath, the board looks like a Japanese room divider, a 
lightweight rectangular grid supporting a thin membrane. No supporting 
ribs, no crown, no net positive down bearing. I think the mass of the 
agraffes is the only thing that makes these pianos playable at even low 
attack levels. Why this was done, and why it is allowed to remain as a 
design approach is still a mystery to me.


> Recently, I  had the good fortune to listen a 7’ 6” Steingraeber at
> Larry Buck’s shop in Haverhill, MA.  I was able to put my hand on it,
> and listened to several people play it a varying volume levels as well.
> This piano has a carbon fiber soundboard and the Dain bridge agraffes
> throughout.  To a lesser degree (in my guestimation)  it suffered the
> same issues as Terry describes – although there was much to like about
> it too.

I haven't had a chance to really explore a carbon board Steingraeber in 
a quiet room. Exposition hall at the height of the crowd stampede isn't 
awfully conducive to detailed listening, but if they exhibit similar 
characteristics it will be for similar reasons. The agraffe design 
(essentially the same, as you note) on both pianos provide good solid 
terminations, so I doubt the agraffes are responsible for the high 
attack level distortion. My call is insufficient soundboard stiffness.


> We have a number of piano design propeller heads out there.

I don't understand why anyone interested in science and tech has to be 
labeled with a derogatory term. My head certainly has no propeller, only 
rocks.
Ron N