Is Bigger Better?

[Delwin D Fandrich]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Farrell" <mfarrel2@tampabay.rr.com>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: May 22, 2001 5:11 AM
Subject: Re: Is Bigger Better?


> "Many old U.S. (and Canadian) grands
> were built to materials and workmanship standards that should make S&S
> blush. Many, also, were given an overall design that was clearly superior
to
> the comparable S&S models. "
>
> Forgive me for being redundant, but I have a hard time making myself
believe
> that an "inferior" piano can be made to be "better" than a "superior"
piano.
> If I understand your post, you are saying that if I pick out a
> well-designed/built old piano - like the Baldwin L or the Everett you
> mentioned (I know of an old junker 6 footer locally) or I suppose an A.B.
> Chase, Henry F. Miller, Chickering, etc. - I can make such a piano (with
all
> the complete redesigning, etc.) into a piano that will be at least as
> pleasing as your average new S&S or M&H? I'm not trying to pin you down
for
> no reason - I want to be sure that it is not really worth seeking out the
> salvage S&S or M&H that of course you may have to pay $5,000 to $7,000
for.

Yes. There is nothing magical or mystical about the S&S designs or about
their manufacturing process. Hasn't been for better than a century now.
(Their marketing department...now that's another subject entirely!)
Seriously, though, given the basics of reasonable design and a solid
foundation there are many pianos out there that can, and should, be made
into wonderful musical instruments. Become a student of piano design and you
will see that there really isn't all that much difference between any of the
so-called modern pianos. Even if the rebuilding work is done in a fairly
conventional manner -- and assuming that the stringing scales are brought
reasonably up to date -- there are many makes of pianos that will perform at
this level. Adding in a bit of redesign work just puts some frosting on the
cake.



> "Are the hammer shanks square to the action rails? Most are, but there is
> the odd exception such as a few of the old Chickerings. "
>
> Could you elaborate on this just a tad? I'm not sure exactly what you
mean.
> I have seen many actions where the hammer shanks and/or the whippens are
not
> square to the rails. Look down at the top action and you see that the
shanks
> and whippens are at horribly divergent angles. Is that what you are
talking
> about? I assume this comes from a mismatch of plate
> design/casting/positioning and keyframe design/placement.

You'll know them when you see them. I'm not talking about the typical
mis-alignment of action parts common to S&S actions. (It's common to many
pianos, actually. I mention S&S because they are the best known. This can be
coped with by the various spacing techniques. What I'm talking about here
are hammershanks that are several degrees off of perpendicular usually found
in very old pianos such as the older Chickerings. It was also common to
several European pianos; Bluthner and Bosendorfer come to mind. We're in the
middle of a Bosendorfer like this right now. It's going to work out alright
because it's getting new keys and a new action stack designed to fit. It's a
lot of extra work, however.



> And what about the effect of key length on the desirability of the piano?

This is a good point. Within some limits, the longer the better. This is one
of the drawbacks to designing a piano to fit a marketing niche.
Traditionally, the goal has been to obtain the longest speaking length
possible regardless of whatever else must be compromised. This led to the
very cramped spacing between the agraffe and stretcher along with the very
thin stretchers found in some pianos. And this led to a relatively short key
with a lot of arch. Still, most pianos in the 175 cm and longer range have
keys of reasonable, if just barely, length. Obviously, something in the 185
range will be (at least potentially) better. Unless space is really an issue
I do recommend something at least 185 to 190 cm in length.

Speaking of something 190 cm in length, has your client played a well
prepared Walter lately? It has a nice shape (OK, I'm prejudiced) and is not
overly wide giving it a reasonably elegant look. It is well braced, has a
good scale (unless it's been changed from the original), a Renner action,
Kluge keys and Renner hammers that are too hard for the piano. But,
presumably, can be voiced down as required. It might be available for not a
whole lot more than the budget range you've mentioned. (No, I don't get a
commission.)

Regards,

Del