[CAUT] Just how much brilliance can a pianist make ?

[David Love]

First thing is that everyone likes it different and you can get trapped
chasing each pianist's individual taste in voicing.  Many pianists,
especially in a concert situation, don't want to have to work too hard for
brilliance--especially through the treble.  Working too hard can compromise
relaxation in playing which ultimately produces the best and most resilient
tone including a fuller and rounder forte-fortissimo.  Acceleration, then,
is more a matter of controlling weight.  Bigger, beefier pianists will have
a somewhat easier time on a piano that is less brilliant.  More diminutive
players will have to add too much muscle which can compromise their playing
somewhat.  Most concert pianos are set up brighter than they would be were
that piano voiced for the living room.  In a concert situation you are more
concerned with how the piano sounds at row 20 than you are at the bench.
Young and inexperienced pianists often don't know that and often feel that
the power and brilliance of a piano set up for a hall is out of control.
Personally, I would rather err on the side of too much brilliance than the
other way as long as the piano is even and predictable.  Ultimately,
however, it's predictability that counts for the pianist.  As long as the
note they are about to play produces what they think it will produce before
they play it, they can manage just about anything.  The lack of
predictability is what drives them nuts--both in terms of touch and tone,
btw.  



David Love
davidlovepianos at comcast.net 
www.davidlovepianos.com

-----Original Message-----
From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Fred
Sturm
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 2:03 PM
To: College and University Technicians
Subject: Re: [CAUT] Just how much brilliance can a pianist make ?

On Aug 22, 2008, at 3:03 PM, Richard Brekne wrote:

> Hi folks.
>
> Ran into an interesting tidbit the other day which prompted me to  
> put the following to you all. I service a relatively young D here in  
> town and there are a few different local pianists who are regulars  
> on it. After summer I was asked by the youngest of these, a 17 year  
> old prodigy, to calm it down a bit. His concern was that he could  
> not get a satisfactory pianissimo.  One of his main influences is a  
> prominent pedagogue in the Russian tradition for the record. I  
> mentioned that a few of the other pianists... one in particular  
> wanted the thing pretty much as it was... brighter really as they  
> felt they could not get enough brilliance out of the instrument.  He  
> kind of snorted and said something along the lines of "thats because  
> she can not make her own brilliance".  Ok... the kids got a heavy  
> hand I'll give him that.....

To which your (unspoken) response is, "just as you are unable to make  
your own pianissimo. It's easy to play loud, not so easy to play  
quietly with control. Come back when you've honed your craft as a  
pianist and we'll talk again."
	The more practical response is to do a wee bit of sugaring to the  
crowns, particularly in the una corda position - he's Russian trained,  
he uses the pedal, yes? Then you don't displease those who want more  
brilliance.

> BUT...  given the physical limitations of the piano I have to wonder  
> something about just how much "brilliance" is in the grasp of  
> players... and in particular if his hands, heavy tho they may be,  
> should indeed be able to out power just about any other accomplished  
> player.  The action will allow only so much hammer velocity yes ?   
> Is not top velocity and for that matter momentum within the reach of  
> just about any very good player ? Just how strong do you have to be ?

Yes, I agree. Any reasonably healthy player can get every last bit of  
useful musical volume out of an instrument. Many "young colts" think  
they can get more, and as to whether the "more" is "useful musically,"  
well, let's just say there can be differences of opinion. I think it  
is more a matter of the physical feel of playing, the need to make use  
of all that youthful excess energy, and the lack of a critical ear,  
but maybe that's just the crotchety old fogy emerging in my  
personality <G>.
	There is a limit to how much power can be transferred from hammer to

strings. You can continue to speed up the velocity, and more "noise"  
will happen, much of it impact (key to keybed, hammer "thwack"), but  
the string and soundboard can only handle so much before focus and  
definition are lost.
	I think the ideal is where the "top brilliance" of the hammer  
(voicing wise) happens just when "useful musicality" is ready to  
disappear (of course, exactly where that line is drawn becomes a  
matter of dispute). But really the very loudest sound (musical,  
setting aside the noise aspects) can be produced from the top of the  
key down (fingers on the keys as a starting point). A well-trained and  
practiced pianist can accelerate to maximum in that span, IMO. (Which  
is not to argue that the fingers should always be glued to the keys.  
Just  an illustration to put force required into perspective).

> This is a question I've never really asked myself and if there is a  
> real significant window of variance here... then I suppose it needs  
> to be put into my voicing awareness box for further consideration.
>
> Thanks for any / all input.
>
> Cheers
> RicB


Regards,
Fred Sturm
University of New Mexico
fssturm at unm.edu