This raises an interesting point: Since (like all other manufacturers of all other products) S&S reserves to itself the right to change it's specifications in whatever way, and at whatever time they choose. So...following the logic of that logic (if you will), it's pretty obvious that (keeping things to actions), the "touch" would have changed fairly dramatically over time; and, the more one works on instruments from various periods the more one might come to this conclusion. And, it might, therefore, follow, that one could legitimately use whatever parts are contemporaneously available today in order to attempt to recreate whatever that original touch (and tone) might have been, and stay within the overall concept of retaining the "Steinway-ness" of the instrument. That part is all well and good; and, I think, qualifies as A Very Good Thing. On the other hand, when one chooses to follow that logic, one has to be aware that not every pianist is going to feel ecstatic about either the sound or the touch. So, another choice one makes in following the above logic is the one that consciously accepts that one's final product may not be acceptable to one or more pianists. If one has multiple performance instruments, that may be cool, because, presumably (since one might choose to leave at least one with a relatively current "stock" setup) there would be other instruments from which to choose, and it wouldn't matter so much if one were not deemed satisfactory. However, if one has only one performance instrument available in a given space, one might wind up with a fairly serious problem. FWIW, statements like the one Jennie relates can often be traced back to the sales pitches developed by the old Piano Travelers' Association. While in the context Jennie relates, the brand name is Steinway, many of these statements/pitches were developed to be used by a Traveler in their day-to-day work, and modified as necessary to fit whatever brand happened to be on the truck. Best. Horace At 12:03 PM 3/7/2011, you wrote: >I am very Stanwood fluent and those tools are very helpful in >re-examining this traditional high velocity system.My curiosity is >tweaked as well. Jeannies point is well taken though,.. Salesman and >confusing statements. > Dale > > >-----Original Message----- >From: David Love <davidlovepianos at comcast.net> >To: caut at ptg.org >Sent: Mon, Mar 7, 2011 11:48 am >Subject: Re: [CAUT] Steinway sound > >I don't know about a "non-steinway" touch but the Stanwood system >users sometimes push the lower limits of action ratios with the >belief that if low inertia is good, lower is even better. I'm >starting to trend the other way, higher action ratios, lighter >hammers, more traditional regulations specs and medium inertia >targets both for tone and response. > > >David Love ><http://www.davidlovepianos.com>www.davidlovepianos.com >(sent from bb) > >---------- >From: Dale Erwin <<mailto:erwinspiano at aol.com>erwinspiano at aol.com> >Sender: <mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org>caut-bounces at ptg.org >Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 14:29:53 -0500 >To: <<mailto:caut at ptg.org>caut at ptg.org> >ReplyTo: <mailto:caut at ptg.org>caut at ptg.org >Subject: Re: [CAUT] Steinway sound > >I find smoke and mirrors very entertaining,...possibly illusionary... :) > > >Dale S. Erwin ><http://www.Erwinspiano.com>www.Erwinspiano.com >Custom restoration >Ronsen Piano hammers >Join the Weickert felt Revolution >209-577-8397 >209-985-0990 > > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Jeannie Grassi <<mailto:jcgrassi at earthlink.net>jcgrassi at earthlink.net> >To: Ed Sutton <<mailto:ed440 at mindspring.com>ed440 at mindspring.com>; ><mailto:caut at ptg.org>caut at ptg.org >Sent: Mon, Mar 7, 2011 11:22 am >Subject: Re: [CAUT] Steinway sound > >And I heard a Steinway salesman who was attempting to sell an 1890s >K with all, I mean all, original parts say, "Now that's the true >Steinway touch!" >Just sayin..... : :>) > >jeannie > >On Feb 28, 2011, at 8:14 AM, Ed Sutton wrote: > >>For what it's worth, here is another question: >> >>David Stanwood's Touchweight Metrology formulas (ca. 1995) have >>brought about a revolution (or evolutionary change) in action >>rebuilding, including, I think it's fair to say, a small cottage >>industry in redesigning Steinway actions. >> >>Is anyone complaining that these instruments "Don't have the Steinway touch?" >> >>(I have heard a Steinway trained salesman say "If you want the >>Steinway touch, you've got to have a genuine Steinway!") >> >>Ed Sutton >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: <mailto:erwinspiano at aol.com>Dale Erwin >>To: <mailto:caut at ptg.org>caut at ptg.org >>Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 10:58 AM >>Subject: Re: [CAUT] Steinway sound >> >> I'm good with this statement Horace. >> In my own practice I have been trying in most cases to not >> deviate to far from the core tonal expectations for several reasons. >>1. I like the basic Steinway sound at its best, & so do many ears >>2. I'm conservative with my clients pianos again trying to enhance >>the best components of the tone. >>3. Redesigning the piano too much can influence its marketability >>in the minds of some. For others they would find it a plus to own >>a Hot Rod so to speak. Hey, different strokes. >> >> I personally prefer to judge the piano by its sound not the >> design. That is..... what pianist do. They don't look under the hood. >> Heres the question. What constitutes a redesign? Most guys out >> in small shops are not compression crowning there boards >> but crowning the ribs to some degree to support crown. Drying the >> board far less. Neither is a Steinway parameter. This is our >> primary deviation. Do these pianos sound like Steinways? It >> doesn't matter what I think if the client likes them. >> >>So here is an opportunity to see my The Erwin & Sons Re- >>manufactured 1930s Steinway B Hot Rod on display if you'll are >>coming to the WEST-PACS. in S.F. next week. It will be there in >>the hall and in the Ronsen Class room. >> Dale >> >> >> > >> > 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 >> > >> > >> > >=
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC