<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2963" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE>
<!--
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
        {margin:0in;
        margin-bottom:.0001pt;
        font-size:12.0pt;
        font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
        {color:blue;
        text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
        {color:purple;
        text-decoration:underline;}
p
        {margin-right:0in;
        margin-left:0in;
        font-size:12.0pt;
        font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.EmailStyle18
        {font-family:Arial;
        color:navy;}
@page Section1
        {size:8.5in 11.0in;
        margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
        {page:Section1;}
-->
</STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY lang=EN-US id=role_body bottomMargin=7 vLink=purple link=blue leftMargin=7
topMargin=7 rightMargin=7>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left>
<P>Hi,</P>
<P>In the recent hammer types thread David Love and others talked about
high-tension and low-tension scales. Quantitatively what does that mean? I'd
like to see some actual, real-world parameters as to the upper and lower
limits <SPAN class=296414205-19102006>of</SPAN> tension for high-tension
and low-tension scales. Would these parameters change correspondingly as the
size of the piano changes? </P>
<P>Ditto for inharmonicity. </P>
<P>I don't ask for much, do I?! ;-)</P>
<P>While we're at it, can soundboard stiffness be evaluated (at least
qualitatively) on your basic fully-strung piano in someone's living room? What
are the major factors that define stiffness? Does downbearing play a role here?
I'm looking for an answer that has specific, measurable quantities like, "A
stiff system has ribs spaced x inches apart with each rib notched into the rim.
Ribs are x inches in profile under the long bridge tapering to x inches then
tapering to x inches at the rim. A stiff board is x inches thick under the long
bridge tapering to ......, whereas a flexible system ..................." And
also, "X piano brand is a good example of a stiff system, whereas x pianos use a
more flexible system..........." You get the idea.</P>
<P>The other thing in this thread that got my attention was the description of
the hammer types matched to the Walter scale. I installed a set of Ronsen Wurzen
hammers on a Baldwin L last year. I would characterize the sound as being darker
and colorful, and maybe needing a little juice especially in the top 2 octaves
for a bit more definition. Needling was not even a consideration for these
hammers on this piano . But David's description of the Wurzens on the Walter
paints a very different picture of Ronsen Wurzens. So what gives? Is there a lot
of difference in Wurzens from set to set? Or is it that if we were to put the
same Wurzens on the Baldwin L and then the Walter, we would have "dark" hammers
on one, but "bright" hammers on the other, the explanation being that the tone
produced is a function of the interaction of the hammer with the board system?
Is it possible for their to be enough difference in the board system to produce
such different tone (needling like hell vs. maybe needing a bit of juice) from
the same type of hammer (assuming the hammers are identical)?</P>
<P>Trying to educate myself. Thanks for any responses<SPAN
class=296414205-19102006> and thanks also to David for initiating this
interesting thread.</SPAN></P>
<P>Alan</P>
<P><FONT face=Garamond color=#800000></FONT> </P></DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> David Love
[mailto:davidlovepianos@comcast.net] <BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, October 11,
2006 10:55 PM<BR><B>To:</B> 'Pianotech List'<BR><B>Subject:</B> Changing the
tone on tone: was RE: Hammer Types<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=Section1>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT id=role_document face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">“They don’t make
pianofortes anymore, they just make fortes”</SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"></SPAN></FONT> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Paraphrased remark
attributed to Dale Erwin’s father that has always stuck with
me.</SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"></SPAN></FONT> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"></SPAN></FONT> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Cellist to
Pianist: “Can’t you play any softer”</SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Pianist: “Well,
actually…no, I can’t”</SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"></SPAN></FONT> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Conversation
overheard at a rehearsal of the Brahms B Major Trio:</SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"></SPAN></FONT> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"></SPAN></FONT> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Tone is everything in
piano work, in my view. The rest is secondary, or simply
mechanical. There’s no precise language for it like Alizarin Crimson or
burnt garlic, and so it’s difficult to talk about with any assurance that your
experience is the same as mine. We can only assume that the words we
choose describe the sound that I think you might be hearing—if you are.
In spite of how my views have been misrepresented, I am really quite open
about tone. There are a broad range of possibilities and a variety of
tastes to go with them. I have customers who love their Yamahas, the
bright and powerfully percussive tone they offer and those who wouldn’t be
caught dead playing one for the same reasons. I have Steinway customers
who long for that dark, warm, singing tone that they recall from their
childhood and others whose Steinways simply can’t be made bright enough or
loud enough. When it comes to addressing the needs of a particular piano
or customer preferences, we need to be open to what the piano can deliver and
what the customer wants. And I am. “Whatever you want” is my
mantra when it comes to customer work, even if I wouldn’t choose it
myself. When rebuilding a piano with original materials I always engage
customers in a discussion about tone, what they like, or don’t like, how I can
make the piano to best suit their tastes. If they want something that
will be difficult to achieve with a given piano, I tell them. I might
even go so far as to say that if that’s what they want, they own the wrong
piano. It can happen. Each piano’s design pushes its tonal
signature in one direction or the other. Scale design, soundboard design
and health, rim structure, plate design, all contribute to the direction in
which the piano can comfortably be pushed. Try to make it into something
it’s not and you end up with a mediocre result at best (a structural disaster
at worst). Will the customer be happy anyway? They
might. It’s likely that whatever you do to a piano that is on the
brink of disintegration will be an improvement. Sometimes we have to be
content to do that—and certainly I have. </SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"></SPAN></FONT> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">When working with old
and tired soundboards, we must (in today’s parlance) accept them for what they
are. Trying to get them to perform as if they were new and expecting the
same type of tone generally leads to a disappointing result. Accepting
the structural and thereby tonal changes that occur with old boards allows us,
if we listen carefully, to perhaps modify our scale design, pick a more
suitable hammer now than the original and/or modify our voicing strategy to
make the best of what the board still has to offer. That can lead to a
very acceptable, even beautiful result. But it will be different from
the original no matter what we do and the sooner we accept that, the better
off we are. We can try and force our own tastes onto the piano but, if
we are honest, only in so far as the piano’s design or condition allows.
</SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"></SPAN></FONT> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">When it comes to
building a piano from the ground up, however, or reengineering a scale and
soundboard, then we are absolved of all previous commitments and we have real
choices that we can make (existing plate considerations
notwithstanding). High, medium or low tension scales are where things
start. From the low tension scales of </SPAN></FONT><FONT face=Arial
color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Estonia</SPAN></FONT><FONT
face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"> to the high tension
scales characterized by many Japanese pianos, each one will have their own
soundboard requirements, hammer requirements and accompanying tonal
character. I happen to like low tension sound (but not too low) better
than high tension sound, so left to my own devices I would chose a platform
that supports that preference. If tonal expectations of a customer were
better associated with a high tension scale, however, then, given the means, I
would be fine to build that as well. Either way, I would expect that
design differences would produce differences in tonal character (let’s put the
wart issue aside for now) and that accompanying hammer requirements as well as
voicing requirements would also be different. </SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"></SPAN></FONT> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">In summary, each
scale and soundboard assembly pushes the instrument in a particular
direction. While there is always a range of possibilities within any
particular design, each design does carry its own tonal bias. As piano
technicians, trying to bring out the best in each piano we come across, we
hear those differences intuitively. We adjust our expectations according
to each instrument and each instrument becomes our temporary standard for the
possibilities of good tone. If we find something that appeals to us we
tend to latch onto it and carry it around as our model. But that can
hurt as well as help us. It helps us by giving us a higher standard for
each piano we encounter. It hurts us in that the expectations we carry
forward are not always realistic—or desirable—for the next instrument and we
can end up trying to force the piano toward our ideal with a poorer result
than if we’d been open to what the piano really had to offer in the first
place. Power, brightness, sustain, clarity, warmth,
richness, dynamic range: in a piano we don’t get to simply opt for the maximum
amount of each. They all exist in a multi-dimensional continuum in which
you sometimes trade one for another in a never ending balancing act achieved
both by design and execution. There are, no doubt, many acceptable
formulas within that continuum dictated by a variety of factors, not the least
of which is just exactly what music is being played. We should probably
accept that in so far as there are a variety of tonal formulas as well as
musical requirements, no single piano (or treatment) will be perfect for all
types of music, players, audiences or technicians. So when given the
opportunity, why not be faithful to ourselves? Vive la difference!
</SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"></SPAN></FONT> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"></SPAN></FONT> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"></SPAN></FONT> </P>
<DIV>
<P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy">David
Love<BR>davidlovepianos@comcast.net<BR>www.davidlovepianos.com</SPAN></FONT><FONT
color=navy><SPAN style="COLOR: navy"> </SPAN></FONT></P></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in"><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"></SPAN></FONT> </P></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>