Sustain was Re: 1974 M & H B

[Otto Keyes]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
New market for all those beaters with collapsed boards.  Do they make adjustable valve springs to incorporate into variable thud soundboards?  

I assume you will also be offering charts, graphs, spreadsheets & the properly esoteric quantification instrumentation in order to correlate one's adjustments to the politically-correct HT, AT, ET, DDT, etc. which may be in vogue at this (or that) precise moment in history.  Must proceed with caution, you know.  :-)

Otto
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Ed Sutton 
  To: College and University Technicians 
  Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2003 4:41 AM
  Subject: Re: Sustain was Re: 1974 M & H B


      While these arguments are worth considering, taken to extreme they would require at least 50 instruments to play the repertoire, or that each performer specialize in a very narrow repertoire. 
      Meanwhile, in order to satisfy a greater variety of sustaining needs, I'm pleased to announce my new invention: The Historically Adjustable Soundboard Damper!  I'll be offering it to all the major manufacturers next week, and look forward to international acclaim.
      Ed S. 
    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: Richard Brekne 
    To: College and University Technicians 
    Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2003 5:30 AM
    Subject: Re: Sustain was Re: 1974 M & H B


    Hi Del 
    Been busy I see :) Just wanted to say that this is the first time I've heard of complaining about too much sustain as well. I dont really know much more about him then he is a harpsichord builder that has a rather special international reputation. He likes old wood. And I guess he makes a pretty fair harpsichord. 

    I posted this because I thought it was an interesting variant as well, and his argumention likewise. 

    Cheers 
    RicB 
      
      

    "Barbara J. Fandrich" wrote: 

        A little off the subject line here, this quote reminded me of something I heard a few weeks back from an eminent harpsichord builder in Northern Europe. Bear in mind the fellow is a piano forte' lover, dislikes the Steinway sound intensly, and in general dislikes the modern piano. 
        His point was that this whole sustain issue is misunderstood from the get go. That is to say that there is no need for nearly the sustain levels modern pianos offer, ... that there is virtually no music written from any time period that requires more then half of this sustain level.  Never heard that argumentation  before. 

        His position was that older instruments of the modern variant sounded better (read mellow) as they lost some of their power and sustain through the years.

      Your friend must not encounter the same jazz pianists that come our way.... Music evolves. 

      This is the first time I've heard of anyone complaining about excessive sustain time. The increasingly hard and harsh sound quality of the modern piano, yes, even the excessively high overall power levels expected from them. But not sustain time. Interesting. 

      Del

    -- 
    Richard Brekne 
    RPT, N.P.T.F. 
    UiB, Bergen, Norway 
    mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no 
    http://home.broadpark.no/~rbrekne/ricmain.html 
      


---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/caut.php/attachments/f1/35/9d/9a/attachment.htm

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--