What would Steinway do

[RicB]

Hi all

This is a welcome line of argumentation in my view.  Essentially, as I 
read this, David argues that the attempt to hold true to a certain set 
of basic design principles should be taken into consideration in judging 
how close to this concept of <<original>> that is floating around a 
given redesign achieves.  In as much as one can substantiate whatever 
such claims are made as true, the argument becomes compelling.

One is going to run immediately into trouble doing this when using a non 
compression type panel in a Steinway tho.  Not necessarily because of 
any factual ground that exists... rather because of the lack of said.  
There IS an ongoing controversy as to whether or not one type of panel 
can perform <<just like>> another.  Take Udo Steingræbers  (I believe it 
was) visit with Ron Overs which Ron wrote about a while back as an 
example. They, renowned rebuilders/builders in our world simply dont see 
eye to eye on this subject. And this is the rule and not the exception.  
There is no base of scientific material strong enough to lay on the table.

The other point is where one more visibly and functionally change a 
design... regardless of reason. Such as the complete removal of the 
duplex system. For me at any rate, here one clearly crosses that line.  
I dont view that as a bad thing at. It is what it is.  And as I have 
said... the redesigner then becomes to much of an element in the end 
result for said to thought of as representing anything <<original>>.  TO 
HIS/HER CREDIT !! I might add if the redesign is successful.

One final point.  Aside from the clearly ethical issue involved here, 
one gets into a kind of Catch 22 position from the redesigners view in 
any insistence upon being true to original design.  On the one hand... 
if said redesign is truly original in intent...then what has one really 
done in the eyes of the user ? One becomes more a rebuilder and less a 
redesigner.  I dont think that serves all the interests of the 
redesigner very well.  I assume they want credit for not just the 
rebuild itself.. but for their design efforts.  

Another point to this in a related subject is how this all affects the 
pianists perception of what is a <<real piano>>.   We all (very many of 
us anyways) see the unreasonably closed attitude by so very many 
pianists.  How is it we are going to contribute to breaking through this 
unreasonableness if we dont make every effort to distance ourselves from 
this <<originality>> concept upon the execution of such redesigns ?.... 
if we rather insist on it staying true.  It strikes me that one weakens 
some of the most important interests I think most of us share in the 
greater discussion here.

Cheers
RicB



David Love writes:


    I think everyone's a little too hung up on what to call it.  The
    Steinway
    rim (still there) dictates (to some degree) the soundboard thickness and
    ribbing which should relate to the overall tension level of the
    scale which
    in combination contributes to the decision about which hammer to
    use.  The
    Steinway redesigns that I have been involved in still, I will assert,
    maintain the same character as the original, they still have lowish
    tension
    scales (though not on a D, of course), they still have an accompanying
    relatively light soundboard with a relatively light rib scale, and
    much more
    like the original (early 1900's) ones, they have a fairly light and soft
    hammer which produces a warm singing tone (without lacquer) with a nice
    range of timbral dynamics.  In my view, these pianos are more like
    Steinways
    than a Steinway--at least as they were intended based on what can be
    inferred by the early modern designs.  Of course, I've removed some
    of the
    bugs that exist in the scale transitions, dropped the bass tensions
    and core
    diameters to enhance the fundamental a bit (who doesn't do that
    these days),
    achieved crown with rib shaping rather than compression but the end
    result
    is what counts.  When a customer walks into my shop, sits down to play a
    total redesign, tells me that it reminds him of the Steinway he
    played as a
    child unlike the ones he now plays in the showroom, who's done their job
    with more authenticity?  The difference is that these bellies will
    come out
    with a lot more consistency, predictability and without the warts.  Of
    course, in any design, there are choices to be made: a little more
    of this,
    a little more of that.  I suppose at some point you could deviate
    far enough
    that it would become something quite different.  But then, haven't
    we all
    heard quite a range of "individual personalities" even with the
    so-called
    originals?

    David Love
    davidlovepianos at comcast.net
    www.davidlovepianos.com