[CAUT] Hu's on first?

[Keith Roberts]

The mass market. The showroom floor sound. What the sales figures show is
the direction manufacturers go. It's my opinion that's why Yamaha went so
bright and hard with their hammers. People don't understand room acoustics.
They are used to being able to turn a dial and adjust sound quality. If the
dealers had a satisfaction guarantee with free return shipping, I think the
salesmen would be talking a different story.
Keith Roberts

On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Laurence Libin <lelibin at optonline.net>wrote:

> Who primarily shapes tonal taste: composers, concert performers, instrument
> builders, the mass market? Fuzzy morning thoughts:
>
> Clearly not composers. Seems to me that instrument builders are the main
> driving force as they innovate in order to differentiate their products so
> as to gain market share or just express personal creativity. The market is
> mostly among amateurs and that's the target most builders aim to please; not
> many can afford to cater only to the elite.
>
> Pianos are unusual in having quite different models for amateur and
> professional use (not so for most orchestral instruments, where quality
> differs more than design), so I guess manufacturers of concert grands pay
> more attention to artists' desires than do, say, fine violin makers--who
> regard themselves as artists--or manufacturers of baby grands and uprights.
> But concert artists also have to balance personal expressive goals with what
> audiences want to hear. In so-called classical music most people tend to
> want to hear what they're used to; in youth-oriented popular music tonal
> novelty is more stressed. This might be one of many reasons why pianos,
> which have a limited, predictable palette of tonal possibilities (compared
> to, say, electric guitars and 'keyboards'), aren't featured so much anymore
> in pop music.
>
> Anyway, pianos and violins are both unusual in having techs who regularly
> intervene between instrument and player to shape tone after an instrument is
> put in use. Concert violinists pay serious attention to what their fiddle
> doctors (who are often also fiddle dealers) say about tone and projection
> because violinists know they can only guess how their instruments sound from
> a distance. Concert pianists as a rule are less humble in this regard, and
> of course they don't generally perform on their own instrument and very few
> have the luxury of traveling with their own trusted tech. Touring pianists,
> too, generally prefer what they're used to, and most are used to S&S. (Keep
> in mind that touch strongly affects perception of tone.)
>
> Especially in academic situations, piano techs should have the opportunity
> to shape tonal taste by explaining and demonstrating why certain sounds are
> more or less effective in certain situations and for different repertoires.
> The more autonomous and authoritative techs are seen to be, and the more
> collaborative (in the manner of fiddle doctors), the less they'll be
> disregarded as mere fixers, like the stagehands. Creating that aura isn't
> easy when you interact with an artist for only a few minutes, but in schools
> ideally you've got time to build relationships with faculty and students.
>
> Laurence
>
>
>
>
> .......> Should performers rule in how our concert hall pianos sound? Well,
> as long as they have a choice between more perceived power, control, and
> timbre change, as you said, then like it or not, they do. (perceived at the
> bench. Pianists don't seem to care what it might sound like in the hall even
> if told that it's better out there). After years at the bench this IS their
> reality) This (performer selection) seems to be what has caused the
> "homogenized" piano sound Laurence mentioned.
> .........>
>
>>
>> Respectfully,
>> Jim Busby
>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/caut.php/attachments/20110222/29580d45/attachment.htm>