Hi Jeff
An excellent question... was just thinking about that as a result of
that post by Jim B. about the three Steinway Techs. I think that in
some factories... voicers actually do have quite widely variant tastes.
If I was to speculate as to why... I'd guess that perhaps some factories
would see this as a positive... and perhaps in other factories it could
be the result of being a low end operation. Manufacturers like Steinway
on the other hand have a self declared need for uniformity. To the
degree that the two factories are being moved closer together in many of
their manufacturing processes. In fact... the exact point you raise
prompted me to think of one of the reasons I am so much looking forward
to Eric Schandalls move to Norway and the potential this has for gaining
experience from his teaching. I have ever reason to want to learn a
much higher degree of proficiency in emulating the NY Steinway voicing
approach. For all the reasons you point at below and also because its
just plain good for me to know how to work out of my own mode better.
I'd expect factory voicers in a heavily dominated Steinway environment
to stick more closely to the mold. I still believe tho that its
important for the independant especially to develop his own style and
get very good and proficient at it. Tho we are asked to create
different types of tonal paletts... vary where the end points of our ppp
and fff end up being... how wide that area is... etc... we have many
many ways of accomplishing that. Some needle this way... some
another... some use nearly exclusively lacquer... etc. I'm not sure how
much it is a matter of having the <<gaul>> as it were to impose my
vision of voicing on the instrument as it is a necessity to achieve a
high level of proficiency in manipulating the pianos voice. Tho that
said... your points are very well taken and will provide me with a good
solid think in the days to come... my thanks. btw... I like and agree
totally with your closing statements. One of the most impressive bits
about the Oberlin seminar was seeing how that gang of Steinway factory
techs and the boys at Oberlin went about problem solving. Problems were
more of a minor inconvenience that really were as much a welcome
challenge as anything else. Amazing the level of performance kept by 3.5
technical positions on 200 Steinway instruments of all ages...
instruments pounded on daily... delivered as any Steinway anywhere else
is. Kind of put a lot of comments I've heard through the years in a new
perspective.
Cheers
RicB
On Sep 15, 2007, at 12:42 PM, Richard Brekne wrote:
> All this goes back to my origional post on this matter. Get
your
> own voice and voicing style down pat. And select the hammers
that
> YOU prefer working with to get it. It is not IMHO even
remotely
> neccessary to adhere to someone elses idea of what any given
piano
> should sound like. The window for acceptable voicing is
actually
> quite large... which means for every 10 pianists you wow....
there
> are at the very least another 10 who will be less then impressed.
>
> My take.. :)
Ric,
I'd like to ask a question regarding this philosophy:
What if the factory installers took this approach and advice? What
identity, if any, would then be associated with the NY Steinway or
any other manufacturer where there was no control over the
manufacturing process? What then, could be attributed to the
instrument that would make it a NY Steinway or a Hamburg Steinway or
a Bosendorfer or a Bechstein or a Yamaha or a Kawai? What would the
name on the plate and fallboard mean? What would that name be worth?
I don't think anyone on this list can argue with the idea that most
all of us are accomplished artists in our very own right. We each
have earned reputations for our work that has built our careers. We
all take pride in our work -- our art, our <<brand>> if you will.
But in this area, here is where I take my pride out of the equation.
It is not my name on the fallboard. I have not been building pianos
since 1853 or whenever. I have not spent 150 plus years developing
an identity that is uniquely mine, that has come to represent
something to the world. When a performer walks up to a piano with a
certain name on the fallboard, he or she has a certain expectation
for what kind of sound and performance it has based on that name and
their previous experience with other examples of it. If a performer
finds a NY Steinway, there is a certain expectation that comes from
that. If one finds Hamburg, there is another expectation. If one
finds Yamaha, Kawai, Bechstein, Bosendorfer, etc., again each has
built a reputation for something different and I personally had
nothing to do with it.
With that in mind, I don't think I have one iota of credibility to
infuse my own personal taste to make a sweeping change of the tonal/
response characteristics of any manufacturer's product. That product
is the very identity of the company, and I don't feel I have the
right to infuse my own preferences beyond working with the parts that
make up the formula of that identity, whether it be an improvement in
my opinion or not. So, with my limited experience and knowledge, I
try to rely on the maintenance/rebuilding processes -tone building/
voicing in this case- as taught by that manufacturer so that it
maintains or mimics as closely as possible, the character of tone/
response - identity - that manufacturer has built a reputation for.
If that means learning how to use NY Steinway hammers and lacquer, so
be it. If that means stabbing 100,000 holes in a new set of hard
pressed Yamaha hammers, so be it. It isn't my name on the fallboard,
and I don't feel I have the right to choose the kind of sound that
piano should have just because I prefer a different method. It is
the artist/buyer/owner who has the expectation based on the name on
the fallboard, whether I like it or not. To change the overall
characteristic of the instrument to suit my preferences does
injustice to both the buyer/owner/artist and the owner of the name on
the fallboard.
Yes. The NY Steinway hammer, properly lacquered, creates a different
palate of tonal offerings from any other hammer. That is NY
Steinway's signature. Other hammers can sound "nice" and "pretty" in
a Steinway. But that sound is missing something. It isn't just
about loud and soft or bright or mellow. It is about the felty
strength of the lioness gently carrying her cubs in her mouth to the
graceful, mysterious stalking to the raucous, meaty, bloody gore of
the lion's kill. It is the romantic sensuality of estrogen and the
chest beating insensitivity of testosterone. One cannot describe
with words the description of the actual sound, but you know when it
is there and when it isn't.
And most every performer I've worked with knows. I can't tell you
how many conversations I've had with artists regarding expectations
from a Steinway that have contained the phrase "you know what I
mean". That is not a question. It is a description of tone.
Viva la difference? Yes. If not an affordability issue, different
tone and touch characteristics are why many choose other
manufacturer's pianos. And agreed, Steinway has a reputation
(perhaps overexaggerated by promoters of its competitors) of
manufacturing pianos with slightly different personalities. And it
isn't that the personalities vary so awfully much -- there is usually
a strong resemblance between all of them. But the differences don't
occur because one installer in the factory chooses to use Tokiwa
shanks and Wurzen hammers and another Renner shanks, with assist
wippens and Abel hammers, and yet another Hamburg wippens, NY pre-84
shanks and Isaac hammers. They occur simply because all of them are
imperfect in slightly different ways, despite the increasingly
reliable consistency of the stock factory parts.
On Sep 19, 2007, at 11:40 AM, johnsond wrote:
> I'm not so sure I care for this new "process improvement" of pre-
> soaking, as it takes too much of the tone building process out of
> my control (in this last case, all of it) but we can deal with it
> if necessary.
I'm not trying to be crass, but I really don't think it is up to us
whether we care for it or not. I see it as NY Steinway making an
effort to protect their own identity and reputation from technician
"error", as they have called it in reference to teflon bushings.
They have that right. They have earned it. The pre-soaking takes our
own personal preferences out of the equation to an extent and puts
the hammer on a path to something that with little more work should
produce the sound they want instruments with their name on them to
produce. If nothing else, it gets the note in the box that erases
all doubt that Steinway hammers do indeed require lacquer. Steinway
is taking back control of the tone building process. It is an
attempt to make it easier for us to achieve that signature NY sound
if we are only open minded to it.
It wasn't teflon bushings that created Steinway's reputation for
clicky actions during those years. It was technicians in the field
who didn't know how to work with them. But that was what allowed
other manufacturers to make claims that Steinway was somehow inferior
and stake claims to market share. If not for their tradition rich
reputation and Steinway's C&A artists working with world class
performers using bona fide Steinway techniques during those times, it
is very possible Steinway could have wound up on the chopping block
over it. Is that what we want? Look, they're trying to help us out
guys. Let's at least listen to what they have to say without our
eyes closed and our hands over our ears.
If technicians have a legitimate complaint about the quality of their
finished parts, that is one thing. But what right do we have to
complain about the quality of Steinway parts if it is our own
ignorance of their processes, or infusion of our own individual
preferences that is the cause of the dissatisfaction? Steinway's
technicians seem to use the parts quite well for the world's most
demanding performers, in the factory, in the C&A department and in
the restoration center (which, by the way, I was told almost always
uses the same prehung hammers/shanks they send us with rare
exception). If I don't know how to make Steinway parts work on a
Steinway, how is that Steinway's fault? If I can't make them work
(or just don't want to), what does that say to my client about my
competence? Blame Steinway? Wanna see some eyebrows go up in a
hurry around here?
I think it is a step in the right direction for them. For their
brand. For their identity. For their future.
And ours.
My thoughts,
Jeff
Jeff Tanner, RPT
University of South Carolina
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC