Hi, Guy, At 04:47 PM 12/4/2004, you wrote: >At 01:34 PM 12/4/2004 -0800, you wrote: > >>Putting on my flame suit... > >Whatever for, Horace? <G> General principles... >>The same way you have had to regulate them since they screwed around with >>the backchecks in the mid - late 80's, and the voicing since not long >>after that...that is, with a smaller and smaller range and domain of >>control and usability...which is, of course, just fine, so long as >>everyone who plays the instrument is largely interested in the keys as >>on/off switches, with smaller usable dynamic range and decreased tonal >>pallette... >> >>not, of course, that I have any opinions on the subject... >> >>Best. >> >>Horace > >It seems like that almost all of the regulating classes I've ever been to >have one common goal. Control. Fly-away is just... well.... like the >difference between pool and air hockey. Mind you, when I was selling >Baldwins, I HAD to know all the rational for "heavy" touch. I am always amazed at the number of folks who never quite realize/remember that, in the "golden days" (whenever they _really_ were, of course, is up to the individual), and you had minor players like Rubinstein concertizing regularly, the touch was noticeably more heavy that it is now...by roughly 15 grams or so, average. It was not until some latter-day makes started making real inroads into sales here that those numbers went down...and, that was not until there was the whole debacle around was is now referred to as "Teflon I". The response, when it came at a much later date to the years of questions was simply to revise the specifications to reflect the (by then) established reality. > But... I believe most of them myself. I've seen too many students raised > on spinets or fly-away imports wind up with a totally compressed dynamic > range. Kind of like standard FM broadcasts, and the signal compressors we > used to use for live rock gigs. Yup - now, all that nifty stuff is simply factory installed.... >On the other hand, Horace..... there's a terrific concert pianist that we >both know who has informed me that she can "adapt" to fly-away much easier >than to heavy. Her "C" was at about 72g when I first met it. Go figure. Indeed...I remember it well...one of the few times I really pulled a Pontius Pilate on someone I really liked...of course, by comparison to that instrument (before anything further was done to it), just about any old clunker is going to feel as if it has a fly-away action. >Personally, even without wobble, I find there to be a tonal sacrifice with >more than 6 or 7 swings, or less than 4 grams. Whichever. Especially in >the lower range. Definitely; and, this is very obvious in recordings. >Super-loose also makes it difficult for me to get the spring the way I >like it. You can only turn yourself into a pretzel trying...go for some modest, otherwise unacceptable, via medium and call it a day. > My vote is still for 4-6 swings, no more, all the way up through the > killer octave. Yes. > The top octave can fly a little, if everything else is happy. Yes - and, that's a big "IF". > Makes "tinkling" a bit .... more... tinkle-y. Yup. >JMHO, Mine, too; based on a fair amount of BS&T Best. Horace
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC