Since this thread has bled over into beginning luck, I thought I'd bring it back. Now I have some questions. Does it make sense to go back to pre-1984 Steinway geometry, find a non-Steinway hammer maker that makes hammers like the good ole days (1900-1920) with lighter hammers and no juice. Then install these parts in an M or L and recreate the original Steinway sound without being worried about over the top requirements of a D? (Aside: I haven't like M's or L's very well, and now I'm wondering if they've suffered from Steinway D designs that don't apply to the smaller instruments. The S model seems to still sound great. I won't start on the reintroduced models. That's another thread.) Several issues arise. Are there original Steinway hammers being made out there? What effect does the older geometry have? It certainly should require lighter hammers. What role does shank flexibility have (I understand that Steinway tapered shanks are more flexible; how flexible should a shank be). How light a hammer are we talking about, surely not the ultra light hammers that enjoyed popularity a couple decades ago. Richard West On Feb 28, 2011, at 2:29 AM, Horace Greeley wrote: > > Hi, > > I think Brent has really hit at least one of the proverbial nails > on the head here when he writes: > > "...In the context of support I think the attitude should bend > towards how can my design work compliment the factory without > alienating the core tonal expectations that will exist on stage for > the foreseeable future." > > While I think that it is probably inevitable that musical tastes > (and, particularly those of pianists) will probably eventually > decide for something (or, more likely some things, at least for a > while) different, the simple fact of the matter is that, even after > all these decades, all the problems, and all the flirtations with > other manufacturers, the "Steinway sound" (however one chooses to > understand that) is still the sound of choice for the vast majority > of active performers. Are there other manufacturers making > competent performance instruments? Of course there are; and there > have been for a very long time. Do artists choose to play other > instruments? C'mon...verifiable history is replete with custom > built pianos, concert tours, jazz festivals, etc, etc, etc, in > which artists do choose to play the pianos of other makers. > However, even after all the fights/disagreements/etc that pianists > ranging from Schnabel to Katchen to Bolet (the list does go > on...I've only noted people whose interest has passed, as it were) > have had with the company, the fact remains that most of > them...even those noted...played most of their concerts and made > most of their recordings on Steinway pianos. The change, as it > comes, will, I suspect, be driven at least as much by people's > conception of tone as they hear it reproduced through their ear- > buds while they listen to mp3/mp4/etc recordings from their iPods/ > Pads as by any other change that might occur. > > The point here is that, however one chooses to describe it (and, it > is, after all, a chimera...unique to each hearer), the Steinway > sound is the sound which is expected by pianists when they sit down > at a Steinway. Something which varies too dramatically from > this...and understandings of that will vary, too...should probably > have the Steinway name and logos removed before delivery. > > In any event, I very much like Brent's concept of complimenting > whatever design might exist "without alienating the core tonal > expectations..."; and working in smaller venues while new designs > are tested more thoroughly to see what does and does not stand up > to performance needs and expectations. That is a very wide field > of tone and response to explore, with tremendous room for > variation; and, as Brent notes, no one's career or reputation winds > up on the line. > > Developing things along these kinds of lines sounds to me like > everyone wins...and that qualifies as a Very Good Thing. > > Best. > > Horace > > > > > > At 09:35 PM 2/27/2011, Brent Fischer wrote: >> Dale, so I hit send before finishing, but I think it's time to move >> towards a progressive center of these discussions, about where >> redesign fits into the institutional setting without compromising >> certain Steinway tonal standards. I can't imagine any dialog between >> a tech and rebuilder/re-designer that doesn't include " I will re- >> design >> this because my science is better than their experience." In the >> context of support I think the attitude should bend towards >> how can my design work compliment the factory without alienating >> the core tonal expectations that will exist on stage for the >> foreseeable future. That's the model of collaboration I believe is >> a workable venue that will also in the end not jeopardize anyone's >> job, either employed tech or rebuilder trying to promote a quality >> project. >> >> What working towards the center for mutual gain means to me >> would be for example, introducing a re-designed Steinway into >> a smaller recital setting, perhaps meant for more ensemble work that >> would promote clarity and projection with a palette of color not >> usually heard in the larger hall needing an edge. That's the >> disconnect I am talking about here that I have yet to read over >> the past weeks including the premise that your redesign should >> be within some tolerance of the norm without the ego that says >> "this is >> the best I've ever heard." Ya, I would say there's some bias when >> it sounds like a few are linked into " A Legend in my own Mind.com." >> How about joining forces with tradition to improve clarity, >> sustain, and >> power without taking credit for re-inventing the wheel, just >> improving on it? >> >> Brent >> >> --- On Sun, 2/27/11, Dale Erwin <erwinspiano at aol.com> wrote: >> >> From: Dale Erwin <erwinspiano at aol.com> >> Subject: Re: [CAUT] beginning luck >> To: caut at ptg.org >> Date: Sunday, February 27, 2011, 9:02 PM >> >> Hey Brent >> Disconnect? What disconnect? >> I guess I missed that one . So, (this designer/re-designer of a >> variety of types of board structures),..... was too busy working >> at the college. >> Am I pickin up some continuous undercurrent of bias.? >> >> Dale S. Erwin >> www.Erwinspiano.com >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Brent Fischer <brent.fischer at yahoo.com> >> To: caut at ptg.org >> Sent: Sun, Feb 27, 2011 7:26 pm >> Subject: Re: [CAUT] beginning luck >> >> Hey Fred, >> >> It's ironic to me that the same disconnect between "re- >> designers" and >> institutions parallels in much the same way as the Steinway lack of >> technical follow up after an "All-Steinway" school has paid a million >> for the designation >> Brent >> >> >> >> >> --- On Sun, 2/27/11, Fred Sturm <fssturm at unm.edu> wrote: >> >> From: Fred Sturm <fssturm at unm.edu> >> Subject: Re: [CAUT] beginning luck >> To: caut at ptg.org >> Date: Sunday, February 27, 2011, 2:20 PM >> >> On Feb 26, 2011, at 4:13 PM, Brent Fischer wrote: >> >> > secondly get to Steinway >> > factory sessions often and mostly get to their C&A training in >> the basement >> > and come away with their endorsement of your work, and leave your >> > electronic tuning aid at home when you go. >> >> >> Hi Brent, >> I think the C & A training (if you mean the final of the four >> regular one-week sessions) has changed quite a bit since you went. >> A couple years ago when I went, there were four of us in the usual >> room, and the only real difference between it and the "tone >> regulation" session was that we had Bs and Ds instead of smaller >> pianos. No work in the basement. I was disappointed, as I had >> heard there would only be two students, and there would be some >> work with the C & A guys, maybe in the basement. Of course, since >> then Kent Webb has taken over the "Academy" so it might have >> changed again. >> No need to leave the ETD behind, in fact better not to, as >> tuning was done by all four simultaneously, with only flimsy doors >> dividing us. Oh, and "their endorsement of your work" is at best >> informal. It is made clear that you are not certified by Steinway, >> though I did actually get a certificate for the last session. But >> it said something like "attended the concert prep session," not >> even weak wording like "completed." Obviously you can let people >> know you did the training, but you are not supposed to imply >> anything beyond that. The world changes. >> Regards, >> Fred Sturm >> University of New Mexico >> fssturm at unm.edu >> >> >> >> >> >>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC