Hi. Doug, Spot on...exactly parallels my own experience. Best. Horace "Douglas Wood" <dew2 at u.washington.edu> wrote: >A few words from my corner of the world on selections. It seems that >we mostly agree that bellies are not all the same. Nor hammers, nor >prep level. This is, IMHO, all part of the Steinway thing, within >certain hard-to-define limits. I've witnessed a lot of retail >selections, and one of the most effective techniques in getting the >selection actually made is to offer contrasting pianos. If they're too > >similar, then the choice is difficult. It has been interesting to note > >how many times the selection has gone very differently from what I >expected at the outset, also. Different strokes for different folks. >Note that different levels of development of touch and tone play into >this in often unforeseen ways. E. g. the owner who had "looked all >over the country" for than M that would have been considered unsalable > >at the local dealership, since it was soooooo soft. For real. >Endlessly fascinating. > >This is less so for performance halls, as in that setting one often >has to please (nearly) everyone with just one piano. This is where I >work on the maximum range and access. The bigger the hall, the more >important "bigness of sound" matters. But often the most interesting/ >colorful pianos are not the biggest sounding. Trade-offs again. But >even the most generous piano can be very easily limited by trying to >make it too "beautiful", or too anything else. Except accessible. The >artists seem very sensitive to whether they can access what the piano >has to offer, as well as what that is that's in there. > >FWIW. > >Doug > > >********************************* >Doug Wood >Piano Technician >School of Music >University of Washington >dew2 at uw.edu > >doug at dougwoodpiano.com >(206) 935-5797 >********************************* > >On Feb 15, 2011, at 8:37 AM, Horace Greeley wrote: > >> >> Hi, David, >> >> Please reread Jim's comments and my response. >> >> He was specifically asking about the relationship between two >> different but integrated issues; not about the totality of the >design. >> >> Best. >> >> Horace >> >> >> At 01:55 AM 2/15/2011, you wrote: >>> I agree that there are differences that can be attributed to the >>> bellies, but with respect to the subject heading, I don't know if I > >>> would say that they rise to the level of obscuring an otherwise >>> fundamentally recognizable tonal signature. >>> >>> >>> David Love >>> www.davidlovepianos.com >>> (sent from bb) >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Horace Greeley <hgreeley at sonic.net> >>> Sender: caut-bounces at ptg.org >>> Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 23:39:02 >>> To: <caut at ptg.org> >>> Reply-To: caut at ptg.org >>> Subject: Re: [CAUT] Steinway "sound" >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Definitely the belly work is core; much more >>> important in the process than tone >>> regulation. By the time an instrument gets to >>> the latter points of the process, the most the >>> tone regulator can reasonably hope to do is to >>> give the instrument as full a voice as possible >>> without overemphasizing the weak spots of the particular system/ >>> piano. >>> >>> Selections in NY can be difficult to parse, >>> too. It's never clear how much time is spent on >>> the instruments, how big the pool of technicians >>> doing the work might be, or how consistent the >>> concept of tone and touch might be between >>> them. From that standpoint, if you're working >>> with a local dealer that is large enough to host >>> a real selection, there will probably be only one >>> or two technicians working on the instruments, so >>> (for better or worse) the degree and quality of >>> prep will be much more regular between them. >>> >>> Actually, after too long a time of too much >>> unpredictability and inconsistency, I think we're >>> getting better instruments overall now than we >>> have since the later-50's/early-60's. While >>> there's still "stuff" (...there's always >>> "stuff"...), and some of it isn't small, it seems >>> as if some of the more egregious manufacturing >>> problems are gradually being worked out. With >>> Ron Losby at the helm, I suspect that the degree >>> of convergence between NY and Hamburg will >>> continue to increase. It will be interesting to see how this all >>> unfolds. >>> >>> Best. >>> >>> Horace >>> >>> >>> >>> At 09:00 PM 2/14/2011, Jim Busby wrote: >>> >David, >>> > >>> >I think the bellies. In voicing class, and in >>> >the other 3 classes we also had 4 different >>> >pianos and got to tweak them, try different >>> >things, and they were a mixed bag. IOW, if it >>> >wasn’t the belly and just the hammers you >>> >could technically make them all sound about the >>> >same using the same voicing techniques, right? >>> >No way here, IMO. They were different beasts. I >>> >wish I had your rebuilding chops and could give a better answer. >>> > >>> >Jim Busby >>> > >>> > >>> >From: caut-bounces at ptg.org >>> >[mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of David Love >>> >Sent: Monday, February 14, 2011 9:01 PM >>> >To: caut at ptg.org >>> >Subject: Re: [CAUT] Steinway "sound" >>> > >>> >Jim: >>> > >>> >The other question I meant to ask is with >>> >respect to the experiences you had at the >>> >factory. Do you think the differences in the >>> >B’s were owing to differences in the bellies >>> >themselves or just differences in the amount of >>> >prep work given to the D’s over the >>> >B’s? Recently a batch of new B’s were >>> >delivered to Stanford and before they were >>> >dispersed to the various rooms around I had >>> >chance to go through them side by side. There >>> >were a lot more similarities than differences to >>> >me. Some differences could be accounted for by >>> >hammer density alone, you could tell. And some >>> >other differences were sectional, some killer >>> >octaves were better than others and there were a >>> >few odd clunker notes here and there but they >>> >seemed to be mostly termination problems. Tenor >>> >and bass sections were very much alike. I >>> >don’t think I sat down to any one of them and >>> >said, wow now that’s different, though I had my favorites. >>> > >>> >David Love >>> >www.davidlovepianos.com >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> >I’ve been in the selection room in NY and the >>> >tone was all over the place with Bs but not >>> >quite as much with Ds, in my opinion. What I was >>> >hinting at is our worn out question; don’t Ds >>> >in concert halls, as well as the Steinway C&A Ds >>> >have a certain characteristic tone that is >>> >“Steinway”? I agree with what you said below >>> >that we have the ability to reproduce it (last >>> >sentence below) but nearly all the rebuilds >>> >I’ve heard are not like Steinway. Nor do they >>> >try to be. That’s why (I think) Brent made his >>> >statements. Not in disrespect to anyone, but who >>> >might better duplicate the “Steinway sound” >>> >if there is such an animal, than Steinway? Now >>> >I’ll bow out and let all the retorts fly. <G> >>> > >>> >Best, >>> >Jim >>> > >>> > >>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC