[CAUT] VOICES and other Steinway stuph

[Richard Brekne]

Hi Ed.... this is really an interesting pair of comments, given the fact 
that both designers are very much in agreement with each other on a host 
of design issues.  My own impression was that both pianos were 
wonderful, and especially the Nossaman instrument reflected very closely 
the kind of sound I'd expected from him given his many comments relative 
to the kind of sound preferences he is after.  Dark, and moody.  To my 
own mind I thought it was a bit too dark....  the fatness of sound I 
believe he was after in the lower tenor was marvelous as long as the 
instrument wasnt pushed to hard... but at levels of play where some 
pianos will start to sound distorted and crashy... that same fatness 
took on a character of tubbyness to me.  Still... I loved the instrument 
and I told him so on the two occasions I had a chance to in Rochester.

The Overs instrument on the other hand was probably the finest executed 
peice of piano manufacturing I've ever layed eyes on.  I found its 
treble area to be very comparable to the Nossaman instrument... 
something I believe should not suprise given the large area of agreement 
these two fine designer/rebuilders have on so many issues.  The 
transition to the bass and the bass itself however revealed a very 
different instrument. Much more power and brightness... which no doubt 
he was after.  I agree with a few other posters that the Overs piano was 
the hands down winner on all counts.

An interesting (to me at any rate) side note to the Overs design was my 
introduction to the new  Petrof 220 which probably was in no 
insignificant degree influenced by Overs design philosphies.  At any 
rate.... that same wonderful chime-ish clear and distinct treble 
characteristice that I perceived in the Overs instrument was immediately 
evident.  I understand that the Petrof people were in Australia and in 
particular interested in the Overs endeavors during the later stages of 
their own design process for the new 220.

But back to your post... the rest looks like good reading... and I will 
take my time on it... but your openings just go to show how wide indeed 
our tastes, preferences... and in the end I suppose our personal 
boarders of acceptance go.

Cheers, and thanks for a fine innlegg.

RicB


    Greetings,

                 Whew,  lotta talk about hammers, manufacturers, and
    opinions.  
    It is obvious that there is no one voice out there.
      To address a couple of individual things:

       The Nossman B at Rochester was one of the finest sounding pianos
    I have
    ever heard.  It sounded remarkably like one of my older customer's
    1936 B, which
    was equipped with new factory hammers in 1949 and only lightly
    played since.  
    Both have great sustain and clarity.
     
    Inre the Overs piano, someone wrote:  

     >     To give the perspective of my own personal taste to that
    opinion, my

     > favorite piano in that showcase was Ron Overs', hands down. <<

         I couldn't stand that piano the first time I played it. It
    sounded thin
    and stringy.  THEN, as the days went past and Ron voiced the piano, 
    I heard
    the tone fill out, becoming round and full, without losing the
    edge.  The tone
    became malleable and big. (more about that, later).  It was great to
    hear the
    development of tone from the raw hammer to the fully voiced one.  The
    difference is night and day and by the time the convention ended,
    that piano had
    everything one could want in a piano!