Hi folks. This subject matter is always intriguing, and frought with so many unanswered questions in so many directions it can make your head spin. I liked the below comments very much, and personally agree with regard to preferences for low inharmonicity visa vi any tonal blend across the break improvements a straight strung instrument may or may not have. That said, again we are confronted with this matter of what sounds <<best>>. I read with interest Stephens comments about the Steinway lead move towards overstrung pianos as being the greatest marketing coup ever. And while I understand the drift and (I think) the degree to which this is has truth, I simply can not escape the fact that the buying public in such numbers as are neccessary to sustain a market preference for this, and other design features, represents a kind of real and tangeble judgement as to what sounds <<best>>. Our individual tastes and preferences are one thing, but what the masses of piano buyers evidently prefer are another... and I'll admit to a point (and only to a point) that these preferences are coloured by fashion, and traditions. Which makes it all the more difficult to get at any real meaningfull definitions of what <<is>> optimal piano sound. I am reminded somewhat of the discussion that rages in the western world about the influence of TV on viewers, visa vi the stance that TV simply reflects viewers tastes... ( mentalities). Still, I liked Terrys basic question, and it echos one I ask many times about historic instruments. Especially in the light of the weakening piano industry, especially in the light that we (as Stephen has pointed out) have arrived at a time when the Steinway sound is indeed being questioned. Why not try and create something new, break the mold as it were ? Stuart has tried... with some limited success. A revival of straight strung or similiar approaches is certainly possible... a revival of square grands... spinets... ets updated with modern technology is also possible. But... for all this to succeed... the public is simply going to have to decide that one piano sound is not really in the end all that interesting.... that piano music has far more potential for expressive interpretation then seems evident today. Difficult to achieve at best. Strikes me that far far to many listeners... and indeed pianists and musicians themselves are not really all that aware of the bredth of real interepretation that really exists given the present situation. As and example, I wonder how many of us have taken the time to listen to a given piece for string quartet played by 3-4 different ensembles ? The lesson can be quite astounding really. Lots of good food for thought. Tho to be honest... I doubt if we are going to nudge the present inertia one iota. Cheers Richard Brekne Ron Overs writes : ....................... Since there should be a shortening of the speaking length from the last plain-strung note to the first covered wire, if this break is also positioned at the break between the tenor and bass in an overstrung design, it will yield a good transition and a lowest-possible minimum inharmonicity for a given length of piano. Now I realise that some will argue that we don't want the lowest possible inharmonicity at the crossover. That's OK if that's what one wants, but my preference is for a low inharmonicity scale, and the overstrung layout would seem to allow for this to be taken further than with straight or oblique stringing. I admit that the overstrung layout also makes a good tonal blend across the break more difficult to achieve, but that doesn't matter provided you are aware of the potential for disaster and position the bridges to achieve a similar stiffness for both bridges at the crossover point. It can be done, though we do see some rather ordinary examples in contemporary and not-so-contemporary designs from time to time. Ron O.
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC