Jim Busby wrote: > Would you agree or disagree with the following statements; (Or re-word, > etc.) > > 1. Unlike a violin (his main instrument) pianos do not get > “better” the more they are played, but due to string fatigue and > soundboard movement, etc., a concert hall instrument is limited in > years it will remain in optimal condition. (I didn’t mention that > hammers/strings may be replaced, etc. I’m talking about mainly about > soundboard deterioration) I'm not so sure violins do either, but that's irrelevant. I haven't seen anything I could call evidence that soundboards run out of music faster the more they're played. Action, hammers, strings, etc, sure. While the soundboard of a little played piano can certainly die compression induced death from humidity swings long before the rest of the piano shows significant problems, I've not seen a soundboard failure in a high use piano that has always been in a stable climate, however many hammer replacements, etc, it's been through. Nothing absolute, but indications are that boards die from a combination of their initial construction method, and climate fluctuations. > 2. The more such an instrument is played the quicker this “optimal > condition” will deteriorate. Quite true. This is why concert instruments are maintained and repaired much more intensely than low use instruments, attempting to keep them most "optimal". > 3. Most concert hall pianos are good for about 12 years. No answer to that one. What's "good"? Pianos can be rebuilt at any time between crate and bonfire, and more than once to maintain concert level performance for considerably longer than 12 years, or never reach that level at all right out of the crate. I've heard many times about that new concert instrument that everyone considers a dog, in spite of repeated efforts to salvage it with the best prep available, that was pushed into a dark studio and forever banished from any possible performance life. "Even" new pianos can be improved, though it might take gutting them and starting over. <G> > Any help will be greatly appreciated. I will past use statements from > some of you, but the basic premise of my argument against his proposed > (“let’s give students more access to concert hall pianos for practice”) > is that the more “pounding’ the piano gets, the sooner its demise. Well, certainly the more pounding it gets, the more time and money it will absorb maintaining concert level performance through maintenance and rebuilding. It can be reduced to an amorphous heap of round cornered splinters eventually by moving it back and forth, or pounding on it with new-age bricks, but I'd say it's unlikely a piano can be outright killed by playing actual music on it with human fingers. My call, at any rate. Ron N
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC