[CAUT] Steinway "sound"

[Ed Sutton]

This has been a remarkable discussion. 
The question "What is a good piano?" has so many factors. 
We have hardly discussed architecture and humidity, to mention two other issues.
In a recital hall where I have tuned, all the pianos sound dull. One day I listened as a visiting violinist tested the stage, walking around and finally finding his performance place at the  edge of the stage, in front of the proscenium, where, unfortunately, the pianos can't go. Incredible efforts have gone into voicing the pianos, which do have problems, I think, but we won't know for sure on that stage.
And what are the effects of 20% relative humidity on a compression crowned soundboard?
Ed S.
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Fred Sturm 
  To: caut at ptg.org 
  Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 7:42 PM
  Subject: Re: [CAUT] Steinway "sound"


  On Feb 17, 2011, at 1:37 PM, David Love wrote:


    While I agree with this generally and also have experienced the effects first hand I have to add a caution about throwing the baby out with the bath, so to speak.


  Yes, absolutely. But I think that for the most part on this list and on pianotech previously, there has been a purely one-sided presentation of these things and thought I should provide a cautionary counter-story. We, as cauts, are in the position of deciding or helping to decide about our concert instruments, whether replacement or rebuilding/remanufacture. It has been stated often, and correctly IMO, that remanufacture is a perfectly acceptable alternative - with the proviso that whoever is doing that work is competent. (One can argue that in any case it is a bit of a crap shoot, as one can't predict outcomes precisely, but let's leave that to the side). 
  Another opinion often stated is that it is especially beneficial to remanufacture with redesign, and the claim or inference is that one will always end up with better than the manufacturer's output, because these redesign elements are based on sound engineering, etc. And all I am saying is it ain't necessarily so. Maybe sometimes, maybe if it is done by someone who knows how to balance things, but it is also quite possible that the sum of all those "improvements" ends up being a negative. Sometimes, not always. 
  Bottom line, one should look before leaping, investigate references, look personally at previous work, have your own faculty do the same, etc. 
  I am all for experimentation, for challenging assumptions and common practices. But I am also painfully aware that the most logical and consistent model in the world is no substitute for the real world, and it is in the real world that we live. A lot of things look good on paper, sound good as ideas, but don't actually work, or not nearly as well as expected; or they have unexpected side effects.

  Regards,
  Fred Sturm
  fssturm at unm.edu
  http://www.youtube.com/fredsturm

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/caut.php/attachments/20110217/8e43a29e/attachment.htm>