Has it begun again?

[Avery Todd]

Rob,

   I'm not trying to speak for Stephen here at all, and I may be wrong
about what he was trying to say anyway, but I "think" what he was
referring to are pianos who have had a lot of "heaviness" problems in the
past (some still do) because of incorrect design and/or manufacturing
procedures.
   To get the touch correct on a piano, why should a rebuilder have to
move capstans, change action geometry, etc., etc. to keep from having
10 lbs. of lead in a key just to be able to push the key down? Then when
you get it down, you almost have to 'lift' it up because of all the lead
in the key. All of this could, and should, have been correct when the
instrument left the factory!!!!!
   And I haven't even mentioned the people who slap on a new set of parts
that don't fit for a given instrument and CREATE this heaviness and all
kinds of problems, never knowing and/or caring that they are the cause of
it. There are even people who excuse it by saying, "Well, there's room for
all quality levels of work". And then get very offended when an unhappy
customer calls in a COMPETENT tech and tells them what is *really* wrong
with their instrument.
   I had an old (well-known name) grand several years ago which was
rebuilt with new (correct) parts, keys releaded, etc., but it still
played like the proverbial Mack truck. So after trying to sell the piano
for about a year, and more than one potential buyer commenting that it
felt like a new piano which needed breaking in, it was decided to design a
new action and keyboard with all the geometry correct. This was done,
installed, finished out, and within a month it sold to a good pianist who
just loved it. No steroids needed. :-)
   Someone has mentioned David Stanwood. If all these problems mentioned
above had never occurred in the first place, people like David would
probably have gone an entirely different direction in their careers.
   Sorry about the rant. This particular type of problem just touches a
sore spot with me.

Avery

>> This isn't just whining. I've taught enuf young children to know that
>>they can
>> have genuine physical difficulties with the modern piano action...this has
>> nothing to do with "easiness" in the laziness sense characterized by you
>> and Ron.  Over time it has simply become an ergonomic nightmare. How much
>> more action weight can we tolerate?  How much more key dip? Are we not at
>> the limit to exceed average human performance, or perhaps beyond the
>> reasonable limits for the "amateur" and "learner" markets (the bulk of the
>> market share).
>
>I'm just a little bit confused here. How much more weight, how much more
>dip can we tolerate? Is the piano evolving to a new level where pianist
>will require steroids? (Say, this could be an idea. Re-classify piano
>playing as a sport to increase school funding!) I wasn't aware that
>there was an effort going on to increase weight and dip.
>
>In all seriousness, I'm probably misunderstanding your point but it
>kinda made me giggle. Perhaps you could clarify. :-)))
>
>Rob Goodale, RPT