<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; =
charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Allen</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>First, I don't understand the need for =
what appears
to be a mildy sarcastic tone in discussing this sort of thing. I don't =
claim to
have developed a "very precse language". I used the phrase in the sense =
of "not
very precise", which simply suggests that there is room and the =
possibility of
more, though not absolute, precision, even if used only between
technicians. Its amazing to me, for instance that most pianists aren't =
aware
that color changes depending on power.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Yes, I have found that if I demonstrate =
to pianists
the various things they can observe by a few simple tests (which take =
just a few
minutes), they are appreciative, and even if they don't retain the =
information
very long, they are more likely to feel comfortable in relying on my =
judgement.
This is very conducive to the Ellis scenario, which, by the way, I think =
is very
sensible.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>No pianist gets from me the more =
detailed voicing
technique info that my message contained. I was just passing on a few =
things to
a technician who had asked for help. But if you work with a pianist very =
long,
as happens in a university setting in particular, and pass on a few =
techical
tidbits when the opportunity arises, eventually they become a little =
more savvy
and understanding of the limitations we have to face, as well as the
possibilities.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I agree that some pianists are tough =
nuts to crack,
believing that they can teach others to perfom and interpret music, =
which they
also believe is the most mystical thing going, at the same time being =
skeptical
that a techician could "teach" an instrument to sound better, let alone =
teach
them anything. I think we live in the same universe.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Bill Schneider</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=awright440@cinci.rr.com =
href="mailto:awright440@cinci.rr.com">Allen
Wright</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=caut@ptg.org
href="mailto:caut@ptg.org">College and University Technicians</A> =
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, October 05, 2004 =
8:32
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [CAUT] voicing a =
D</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>William,<BR><BR>So can we assume that you have in fact
developed a "very precise language" describing tonal or voicing =
problems, and
that you're able to "teach pianists how to listen objectively"? My =
hat's off
to you then, and I'd like to see the dictionary for it.<BR><BR>We must =
live in
parallel universes. In mine, more often than not, (with exceptions, of =
course), serious pianists are far too focused on their own (yes, very
subjective) worlds of music to have much energy or interest to expend =
in the
direction of a piano technician discussing anything with any technical =
subtlety. Their eyes glaze, and attention wanders, long before much =
real
understanding has occurred. <BR><BR>My experience has been that the =
most that
can be hoped for is something in between Jim Ellis's recommendation =
(make the
piano the best you can and tell them that it's fixed) and your =
best-case
scenario of mutual and satisfying edification and technical =
problem-solving,
with the reality more often than not leaning towards Jim's
scenario.<BR><BR>Your approach to voicing seems very solid, though. =
I'm sure
you get the job done nicely.<BR><BR>Respectfully,<BR><BR>Allen =
Wright<BR>On
Tuesday, October 5, 2004, at 02:24 PM, William Schneider =
wrote:<BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR><?fontfamily><?param Arial><?smaller>Hello =
Wim<?/smaller><?/fontfamily><BR><BR><?fontfamily><?param =
Arial><?smaller>I
am always surprised that piano technicians haven't developed a very =
precise
language for describing tonal, or voicing problems. In fact usually =
the most
basic observations don't seem to have been made, or at least are not =
mentioned. This is not a criticism of you in particular, but I do =
see lots
of room for improvement in the profession. I also see it as our
responsibility to help pianists describe what they're hearing, which =
means
teaching them how to listen objectively. It is perhaps the notion =
that
timbre is subjective that has prevented us from examining the many =
tonal
attributes can be objectively observed. There will still be plenty =
of room
for individual preferences when that has been
done.<?/smaller><?/fontfamily><BR> <BR><?fontfamily><?param =
Arial><?smaller>Looking
at individual notes in the various ranges of the piano (when in =
tune) one
would do something like the
following:<?/smaller><?/fontfamily><BR> <BR><?fontfamily><?param =
Arial><?smaller>Check
Hammer spacing, string level (phase problems),
then<?/smaller><?/fontfamily><BR> <BR><?fontfamily><?param =
Arial><?smaller>Check
the strike point (ie. seeing that the hammer strikes the string at =
the
correct antinode). This is best done right after the hammers are =
shaped.
This is done by sliding the action in and out a fraction of an inch =
while
repeating a loud blow. The right spot emphasizes the fundamental =
lower
consonant partials, so you have to listen "low' in the sound. When =
you get
some skill doing this, you'll hear tonal changes in the bass with =
movement
of as little as 1/64th inch. The factory strike point isn't always =
right. No
amount of needling or lacquer will get rid of dissonant partials or =
loss of
power due to incorrect strike =
point.<?/smaller><?/fontfamily><BR> <BR><?fontfamily><?param =
Arial><?smaller>Check
the tone at ppp, and sugarcoat untill it's clean and =
even.<?/smaller><?/fontfamily><BR> <BR><?fontfamily><?param =
Arial><?smaller>Next,
compare power curve to color curve. Does the tone get brighter the =
louder
you play. (One of the areas for individual preference is here; how =
much
brighter do you want it?) If the color curve ever reverses direction =
as you
crescendo, you'll have two problems. First a lack of sustain at that =
power
and above, second the tone will appear dull and sometimes coarse. =
What you
are hearing is that the hammer is softer underneath than above, =
which
suggests the solution. The coarseness can be caused by either of two =
things,
sometimes both: 1. a hard spot high in the hammer, which can be =
fixed either
by hardening below, if you want a brighter piano, or softening the =
hard spot
and doing nothing below, or both. The choice you make will give you =
a
different piano from the others, but still a musical one. 2. The =
coarsness
could also be the result of a new phase problem. Even though the =
hammer is
level with the strings, the boundaries between the softer and harder =
parts
of the hammer underneath may not be level with the strings. When you =
play at
the relevant power level, this sounds just exactly like the hammers =
and
strings were never mated to each other. Play at that power and check =
the
tone of the left string only against that of the right string only, =
then
needle at the appropriate depth on the brigter side, until both =
sides sound
the same. This softening will gain you power because the strings =
will sound
in phase.<?/smaller><?/fontfamily><BR> <BR><?fontfamily><?param =
Arial><?smaller>In
general, it's a correct relationship of hardness between the upper =
part of
the hammer and the lower that's the issue, not the absolute hardness =
levels.
The hammer should get harder as you go deeper into it; that's what =
makes the
power and color curves move in the same direction. If you want a =
piano with
a lot of punch, the levels will be harder overall. If you want a =
lush piano,
make them softer. You can be very creative in deciding how lush at =
ppp and
how snorty at =
fff.<?/smaller><?/fontfamily><BR> <BR><?fontfamily><?param =
Arial><?smaller>It
sounds from your description like you may have a color curve =
reversal going
on. A reasonable person could call the resulting sound unfocused. =
Good luck.<?/smaller><?/fontfamily><BR> <BR><?fontfamily><?param =
Arial><?smaller>Bill<?/smaller><?/fontfamily><BR><BR><BR>At
07:29 AM 10/1/2004, you wrote:<BR><BR><BR><?fontfamily><?param =
Arial><?smaller>I need some help from
some of you who have lots of voicing experience.<BR> <BR>The D =
in our
concert hall has a problem, at least as perceived by one of our =
piano
faculty and a musicologist. They differ on where they hear the =
problem, but
it seems to be the same sound they hear. They describe it as a wave =
length
that is very wide, as opposed to a more focused wave. It is not so =
much a
twangy sound and it lack a certain amount of depth. They are even =
leaning
towards a soundboard problem. The piano is only 2 years =
old.<BR> <BR>I
have lacquered and voiced the hammers last year, and this summer =
spent quite
a bit of time leveling strings, making the sure the hammer strike =
point is
level, etc. All the usual fine point. But I want to see what I can =
do to get
more "focus" out of the =
hammer.<BR> <BR>Thanks<BR> <BR>Wim<?/smaller><?/fontfamily><BR>=
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>