Don Mannino wrote:
(After skipping a lot...)
> Del Fandrich wrote:
>
> > But, probably, what you are saying reinforces what I am saying. There is
> a lot of sameness in all of the pianos. Their designs are similar, certainly the two
> Steinways, and the Kawai aren't all that much different. And now, with Steinway trying
> to emulate the Yamaha/Kawai sound, the differences are probably even more subtle. It
> would seem that no one of these pianos really stood out over the others. It has been our
> experience that when one instrument clearly stands out, it makes itself known.
>
> (commentary on classical music removed for brevity)
>
> Del, I really have to take exception to the generalities you have given
> here. How many Kawai EX pianos have you really listened to and examined? I
> would be very interested to know this, since you are sort of pigeon-holing
> this concert piano into your perception of what a "Japanese" piano sounds
> like. Perhaps I am wrong, but I really feel you haven't been around
> recently made Kawai pianos enough to form an accurate opinion of them. Have
> you?
Don, you're right. I don't have extensive experience with Kawai EX pianos. It's been about
a year since I really listened to one. But what I said was that their designs are similar.
And, unless the piano has been changed quite a bit since them, that is still true.
Perhaps there is some validity to your protestation about my tendency to "pigeon-hole"
your concert grand in with my perception of what "Japanese" pianos sound like. Times and
pianos change. I'll take another look. It's just that it has been my experience with them
to date that has led me to the perceptions that I have formed. They didn't just pop up out
of thin air.In reference to the Van Cliburn competition, my apologies as well for
referring to the third piano present as a Kawai. But my comment is still valid. I didn't,
and don't, believe that very many pianists these days are being forced to perform on a
particular piano based on the name plastered across the side. What I said was, "when one
instrument clearly stands out, it makes itself known." Which, I think, is also what you
were saying in the three or four paragraphs above. It still seems to me that no one piano
clearly stood out at the Van Cliburn competition.
> Today at NAMM I heard a CF-IIIS and a Kawai EX being played. I assure you,
> they are completely different sounding, in spite of the general
> similarities in their designs and materials.
As I said -- and now I find that you agree -- their designs are similar. As you well
know, one can take three Steinway D's and may them sound completely different. Why
shouldn't the CF-IIIS and the EX sound different? I suspect that a reasonably good voicer
could also make them sound quite similar. Though I hope he or she would be able to resist
the temptation.
> The reason that competition pianists choose the Kawai piano so often is
> because it suits their style of play and allows them to play the piano better.
If, indeed, the Kawai piano stands out, I would hope that we've finally arrived at the
point when all performing pianists have the freedom to choose whatever instrument best
suits his or her tastes and preferences for any given performance.
> From my own view as a technician and pianist, the EX takes the best
> properties of a good New York D (Power, projection, sustain) and adds the
> best of the Hamburg D (good tonal range and expressiveness, extreme
> consistency of touch and tone through the scale, and a more clear tone),
> while including a character of tone unique to the Kawai.
>
> Del, I feel you should take a closer look at some of the pianos being made
> today, and allow yourself to acknowledge the success of those who have
> really pushed concert grand piano design and construction to a higher
> level.
Don, I do acknowledge the success of those who have really pushed concert grand piano
design and construction to a higher level. It's just that most of this success has come in
the construction end of the equation, not the design. In your following list only the
Bosendorfer Imperial is substantially different from the mainstream. (The Fazioli is of
very conventional design, simply made a foot or so longer and built really well.) Well,
OK, the Bluthner also has some differences. And, to its credit, a uniquely different
sound.
> The Kawai EX, the Yamaha CF-IIIS, the big Fazioli, the Bosendorfer
> Imperial, and the Bluthner are all good examples of pianos with distinct
> personalities, and each has at least some desirable qualities in their
> tone. You should not say that there is no variety in piano tone today! The
> problem is that there are not enough of these other pianos available for
> pianists to play regularly, so they stick with the available (and usually
> very good sounding) instruments.
All right. I won't say there is "no" variety in piano tone today. But there is very
little.
> --------
>
> On a related branch stemming from this idea: When we do hear concerts
> played with a different sounding instrument, what is out reaction? Do we
> complement the unique tone, or to we pick on it and criticize it? How many
> of you enjoy listening to Beethoven being played on a fortepiano of his
> era? You don't have to prefer the sound, but would you enjoy the experience
> or simply criticize the tone?
>
> We technicians can be the worst at squelching creativity and variety.
> Here's another example: How many times do we hear that grand rims have to
> be made of Maple to be any good! Nonsense - other materials work great, and
> some may contribute to a different tone quality. Yet technicians turn up
> their noses at it and call it inferior ("Ah, that B___ just doesn't project
> like a good S___" - ever heard that?).
And finally, here is something we completely agree on! Well, almost completely. More on
maple later. I have long said that the piano technical community is right in the forefront
of squelching new ideas in piano design and construction.
> While I'm on the subject, has anyone ever considered why Maple is used so
> often for US built rims? Stop and think about it - could it be because it
> is nice and hard, it is available, and when it began to be used widely
> here, it was cheap? In other parts of the world there are similarly
> suitable (and hard) woods which work great. The power of the Kawai EX
> proves that maple isn't necessary for good tone production. And my 30 year
> old 6'1" grand with a rim made of "select hardwood" is going along just
> fine with good crown, a powerful tone, and plenty of sustain. Yeah, I know
> - we have to wait 100 years to convince some of you. Sorry - I expect to
> be dead and forgotten by then.
You are correct. Piano rims do not have to be made out of maple. Even in the US other fine
woods have been used. I've seen oak, birch, white ash, etc. Sadly, I have also seen
poplar. In Asian pianos I have also seen good and bad choices made. And yes, I am critical
of the phrase "select hardwoods." Far to often that has been used to cover up -- or
glamorize -- the use of a species of wood that is softer that any spruce, pine or fir.
While removing a soundboard from a rim, if substantial amounts of rim stock pull away --
as in easily tearing apart -- that wood is too soft for its intended purpose.
Don, we've had this discussion before. The wood used in the Kawai EX may be the hardest
wood in the world and it may -- probably is -- be entirely well suited for rim making. My
point is, why not just say what it is? Even if several different types of wood are used.
Why not just say so? To use the phrase "select hardwoods," sounds too much like a lawyers
(politicians?) term when he wants to give himself some weasel room.
> Well, enough ranting and raving. I think my main goal in writing this is to
> encourage everyone to stop generalizing, and to keep an open mind. Don't
> pre-judge Del's next effort based only on the Baldwin Hamiltons you tune,
> and don't judge Kawai's tone only on some 20 year old KG-2Cs! Things
> change, and sometimes they change for the better.
>
> Don Mannino RPT
---------------------------
Always interesting, Don. Always interesting.
Del
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC