acoustic? ACOUSTIC???

[Jim Coleman, Sr.]

Hi Tom:

In regard to the "acoustic" piano debate, I must add that the word piano 
has an entirely different meaning to people in Germany and other European
countries. They use the word piano to designate "vertical piano" whereas
when they are talking about Grand pianos they call it a wing (flugel) which
comes from the fact that the lid raises like a bird wing. So, in a sense we
also use modidiers like Vertical or Grand, but they have a completely 
different word for each. I don't know how they designate electronic 
versions. Perhaps Barrie of UK or Antares of Amsterdam could enlighten us.

Jim Coleman, Sr.


On Fri, 13 Feb 1998, Tom Cole wrote:

> JIMRPT@aol.com wrote:
> > 
> > 2. In regard for and to my capitulation you must, equally kindly, agree to
> > refrain from calling our beloved transporter of soul and spirit an "acoustical
> > piano".
> 
> Now that you mention it, "acoustical piano" doesn't sit so well with me
> either. I wish we could step into a specially modified British phone
> booth, ala Dr. Who, and travel back to that time and place to speak with
> the individual(s) who mis-coined this little kludge. Maybe he/she/they
> could be persuaded that "piano" means "piano" and that the come-latelies
> need to have a different word.
> 
> Sure, clocks with hands got retronymmed "analog" to distinguish from
> "digital" but that made more sense. What "acoustic" adds to "piano" is
> questionable. The piano is widely understood to be for the benefit of
> our hearing organs. Isn't it a little too overly redundant to say
> "acoustical"?
> 
> As someone mentioned earlier, in reference to piano tone getting more
> brilliant over the years, maybe we could change the name to "forte"
> and... Nah, I'm too attached to the word "piano". Here is an instance
> where Occam's razor should be applied - to shave off this unnecessary
> modifier.
> 
> Tom
> -- 
> Thomas A. Cole RPT
> Santa Cruz, CA
> 
> 
>