Ed~ Very astute. Once again, you have stated the situation much more precisely than I ever could have. (I noticed however, that you responded in English... ;-) ) I realize that what I may be doing is questioning the status quo, or the water in which everyone swims, which to many here may seem less than useful. But here goes: Practicing only on Steinways is "safe" for pianists, IF they can also assure that they only perform on Steinways. (Which is what almost every pianist aspires to, right?) Pianists (and music school administrators) like to minimize risk. They have enough to worry about: They are expected to give "Perfect" performances. (Play exactly the right notes. Bring in exactly the right amount of money or new recruits. -Often uninspiring performances, but perfect. -At least, note-perfect.) They want to be recognized as having done the job, the one that they're expected to do, well. Predictable means dependable means mission accomplished means successful. And, of course, public image is paramount. And, apparently, nothing enhances public image like a high profile name like Steinway. (But there are others...) Many pianists today, I have observed, experience great difficulty coping with pianos of different make, or actions of different touch, or ones that are voiced differently or respond differently than what they expect. In the old days, being able to cope with all different makes and kinds of pianos was a requisite skill of being a concert artist (or a piano technician!). You had to be sort of a musical ambassador. Now everyone wants the road paved for them. -To only have to speak in one language, (i.e. their own), as you so succinctly put it. Note also, the situation with "Steinway Artists": How they must perform on a Steinway, unless there is no alternative. And of course, it is considered a great prestige to be a "Steinway Artist". This is indeed a very clever system that Steinway has set up. Sort of a self-fulfilling prophecy, in a way. There is much more to this than merely Steinway's advertised claims as to why "pianists prefer Steinway". Why do you suppose Yamaha and Kawai are following suit, trying to set up their own Concert and Artists Divisions, and trying to undermine Steinway's well-entrenched position as de facto standard? Everyone wants to become the de facto standard- -it just makes life infinitely easier. You don't have to work as hard as you do if you are considered #2 or #3. You have arrived. You can rely on reputation to do much of the work for you. -Even cut corners, if you feel like it. Pianists look around them to see what all the other pianists are playing. Many of them are, unfortunately, more than somewhat insecure. They definitely don't want to be in the minority. They don't want the public to wonder why they aren't playing a Steinway. Does that mean...heaven forbid...they're not good enough? If the public perception were that Yamaha or Kawai were the "standard" piano, then that piano brand would be the one to play. After all, aren't pianists doing this for the public? Many pianists now refuse to perform on any piano but Steinway. Many aspiring piano technicians now believe that becoming competent to service Steinways (and only Steinways!) will put them at the top of their profession. What is wrong with this picture? (Nothing?... Okay... ) ~Kendall -----Original Message----- From: Ed Sutton [mailto:ed440 at mindspring.com] Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2008 12:15 PM To: caut at ptg.org Subject: Re: [CAUT] "All Steinway" Schools. The problem with... Is it possible that only practicing on one brand of piano results in performers who only know how to play that brand of piano, and so, believe that it is the only best piano for performance? Kinda like knowing that English is the language everybody else should learn to speak? ES Kendall wrote: > > Only practicing on one kind of piano, or one brand, severely limits > the pianist in his ability to be able to cope with a number of > different pianos in diverse venues and performance situations. >
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC