Consider the situation of the artist choosing from 3 unfamiliar pianos, a few hours before a performance. Is he motivated by curiousity to try something unfamilair, or by fear of failure, and so picks something he has played for thousands of hours? Add to it that the label says Steinway, but it the most un-Steinway like piano he's ever seen. (Different than sitting down to a Fazioli, Bechstein, Shigeru Kawai, which are clearly not Steinway.) Nothing in his training or tradition helps him to understand this piano. For pianos like this to be appreciated and accepted will require a significant cultural change, probably a change of technique and musical conception. (And perhaps adoption by a very big famous name.) If such is to be. Meanwhile, the big stage is the tiniest percentage of pianos... Ed Sutton > > Your words describing it sound quite compelling, but the proof is in the > pudding: do those instruments actually meet acceptance in the concert > hall? Do pianists want to play them? Or is it that they are all wrong, > don't know what's good for them, and need to be re-educated into how to > listen to and respond to a piano? In which case, I'd say it is a lost > cause - at least for the concert hall. So the question I have for you is, > where is there such an instrument in a concert hall, an instrument that > is in demand compared to other available instruments, chosen at least a > good portion of the time by resident and visiting artists? From what I > have heard, the answer is no (with the probable exception of Ron Overs' > instruments in Australia - but I think that is a different animal, from > my experience playing the ones he brought to Reno and Rochester). > > Regards, > Fred Sturm > fssturm at unm.edu > http://www.cdbaby.com/Artist/FredSturm >
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC