:-)
P
In a message dated 2/14/2011 4:50:37 P.M. Central Standard Time,
davidlovepianos at comcast.net writes:
Yipes, I think I know how you meant that but I wouldn’t say that’s quite
a fair characterization. Not even sure where to begin but this gets into
dangerous territory about trying to characterize all Steinways, comment on
what the Steinway sound is or on alternative rebuilding procedures in one
breath. Steinway failures are the favorite whipping boy lately but not all
Steinways sound bad or have failed killer octave problems (we should also
be careful to distinguish between Steinway executions of 1920 and 2000—there
are differences). Not all RC&S boards have perfect treble sections
either. The open characteristics that can be present in a compression crowned
board with light rib scales can by squelched by an RC&S board that puts too
much emphasis on not being overdriven or fails to account for the
stiffening characteristics that the panel contributes in spite of the calculations
which tend to ignore it. Grain angles, rib feathering procedures and
patterns, bass and treble cut off bars all contribute to the entire tonal
envelope but the devil is in the details and there are a wide range of choices and
outcomes possible in RC&S boards some favorable some not. Some of the
boards I’ve heard that I liked the least were ones that were overbuilt to
insure adequate rib support (and I’m not talking about Dale’s projects).
These pianos, in fact, I liked less than some cc boards with slightly
compromised killer octaves. Identifying specific tonal goals and how to get there
is very tricky business. But I think it has less to do with cc versus RC&S
and more to do with understanding the strengths and limitations of each
and how the specific design features and choices impacts the tone generally.
Sometimes what seems like a good idea on paper doesn’t really translate to
a musical outcome, one that makes the piano best suited for what it’s
really designed to do which is interpret music. Sometimes a board that can be
overdriven is desirable or at least should be achievable if the artist
wants it, for example. Having explored a number of design “plans” in
different iterations from full blown all the bells and whistles to more modest
approaches, I can say that more and more I find myself treading more cautiously
with certain design features not because they don’t make sense but because
the way in which they can alter certain musical aspects of the piano into
which they are incorporated. But that doesn’t mean that new designs and
approaches can’t produce musical outcomes indistinguishable from more
traditional ones or that traditional ones necessarily guarantee any particular
result either.
David Love
www.davidlovepianos.com
From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Jim
Busby
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2011 1:01 PM
To: caut at ptg.org
Subject: Re: [CAUT] Steinway rebuilds
Dale,
Do you think Brent would be correct if he was to say “send it to Steinway
if you want it to sound like a NY Steinway.” Your pianos certainly don’t
sound like a NY Steinway (thank goodness!)
Jim
From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Dale
Erwin
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2011 1:40 PM
To: caut at ptg.org
Subject: Re: [CAUT] Steinway rebuilds
Hi Brent
You probably won't take this well but this kind of pedantic attitude
deserves a response. From my perspective this is like drinking the cool-aid
willingly.
It also says a lot about the respect you have or don't have for the
nations rebuilders and their work. It says that you believe that only Steinway
has the magic wood or some such nonsense. The market cornered on varnish.....
Come on...Really? Frankly. Its insulting
Dale S. Erwin
www.Erwinspiano.com
Custom restoration
Ronsen Piano hammers
Join the Weickert felt Revolution
209-577-8397
209-985-0990
-----Original Message-----
From: Brent Fischer <brent.fischer at yahoo.com>
To: caut at ptg.org
Sent: Mon, Feb 14, 2011 12:21 pm
Subject: Re: [CAUT] Steinway rebuilds
Truth sir, you are spot on, like white on rice. Send it to the Steinway
restoration center for the real driving tonal power you have come to
expect from
them. Of course, you are aware that you don't want them to drill or string
it for you, but you will get a performance quality sound that you want and
furthermore they still varnish the boards instead of coatings that let as
much as 38% more moisture penetrate the cell structure. And if you
want to get the plate processed correctly ship it to Austrailia and
have Overs do his termination hardening repairs. Steinway won't mind,
just let them pick the plate color.
Brent
--- On Mon, 2/14/11, Mckeever, James I <_mckeever at uwp.edu_
(mailto:mckeever at uwp.edu) > wrote:
From: Mckeever, James I <_mckeever at uwp.edu_ (mailto:mckeever at uwp.edu) >
Subject: [CAUT] Steinway rebuilds
To: "_caut at ptg.org_ (mailto:caut at ptg.org) " <_caut at ptg.org_
(mailto:caut at ptg.org) >
Date: Monday, February 14, 2011, 9:02 AM
Thanks to everyone for the discussion of laminated soundboards, especially
Del Fandrich.
Now a question about Steinway soundboards. A rebuilder once told me he
prefers not to replace Steinway soundboards, because a replacement never
quite gives you the “Steinway sound.”
Any truth to it?
Thanks,
Jim McKeever
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/caut.php/attachments/20110214/a07f6151/attachment.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC