Tuned front duplexes

[Farrell]

> But, as you say, why torture the pianist in order to get a little
> more 'projection.' It always comes at the expense of sustain and dynamic
> range, specifically at the bottom end.

Specifically, what do you mean by bottom end? The lower partials of each
note? Or the characteristic of a piano's tone to change a bit when playing
softly (I think that is part of "dynamic range")?

I'm enjoying reading this thread immensely. I was going to ask about the
maximum practical size of an auditorium for good piano performance. I'm glad
you commented on that.

Thanks.

Terry Farrell

----- Original Message -----
From: "Delwin D Fandrich" <pianobuilders@olynet.com>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 1:47 AM
Subject: Re: Tuned front duplexes


>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Phillip L Ford" <fordpiano@lycos.com>
> To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
> Sent: November 08, 2001 12:00 AM
> Subject: Re: Tuned front duplexes
>
>
>
> Thanks, Phil, for bringing this up. I've been kind of pondering the
question
> this afternoon and found myself increasingly bothered by this whole issue.
> Specifically, the idea that the piano must 'project' out to fill an
> auditorium way bigger than it was ever intended to accommodate and filled
> with way more people than can comfortably hear and enjoy the performance
> regardless of what that 'projection' does to the musicality of the
> instrument. Perhaps it's time to put a Wal-Mart keyboard up there with a
> gazigawatt amplifier and umpteen dozen speakers and be done with it.
Surely
> it wouldn't sound much worse than some of the poor pianos that have been
> stretched way beyond their limits.
>
>
> >
> > What constitutes 'projection' is an interesting question for which I
don't
> > really have an answer, even though I'm the one who cavalierly tossed out
> > the term.  If pressed I guess I would say tonal content that allows the
> piano
> > to be heard over the output of an orchestra or a bit of extra power or
> volume
> > that allows the piano to be heard further back in a large hall (that
> definition
> > seems sufficiently nebulous).  In any event I think most of us would
agree
> > that we're talking about something that only applies to a large hall and
> this
> > situation represents a tiny fraction of the situations in which pianos
are
> > used.  So the question of whether or not to used a tuned duplex would
> > really only apply to a concert piano.  For other pianos, why torture the
> > pianist in order to get a little more 'projection'.
>
> Well, you're assuming that this tuned-duplex system actually does improve
> that mystical 'projection.' I'm unconvinced. It seems to me--and I've not
> done any tests at all to confirm my ideas about this--that 'projection'
> depends on a rather percussive attack sound and, while that can be aided
by
> a precisely tuned duplex, it is more a function of a very hard and/or
dense
> hammer. But, as you say, why torture the pianist in order to get a little
> more 'projection.' It always comes at the expense of sustain and dynamic
> range, specifically at the bottom end. The piano loses the softness and
> warmth of pianissimo. It becomes simply loud and less loud.
>
>
> >
> > As to whether the
> > performer should have the worst seat in the house, that's another
> interesting
> > question.  Since he is there being paid to do a job and to perform
> > for his 'customers' then if a design changes makes things better for the
> audience
> > and worse for the pianist should it be incorporated?  Maybe.
>
> Then why not simply install a PianoDisk and be done with it. I don't go to
> concerts to hear a mechanical performance. I go to see and hear a real
live
> human, one with emotions and a passion for the music. And, hopefully, some
> of that passion will come across during the performance. I don't see how a
> performer can get too excited about a performance when the piano sounds
like
> a tin can and we tell him/her that this is to be expected because the
piano
> must 'project.'
>
> But then, I find I don't go to very many concerts these days that are held
> in large auditoriums. Increasingly, I find them dead and boring and
> frustrating. On the other hand, we furnish a piano for a small recital
room
> that holds about 50 to 65 people where I've enjoyed some of the most
> exciting performances in my experience. While the performers may not be
> World Class Pianists by most traditional definitions they are real people
> who are in love with their music and passionate about their performances.
>
>
> >
> > I think we already expect them to make some accommodations, such as
> > limiting dynamic range on the low end so that the sound will 'project'
> into
> > a large hall and to use a piano that is perhaps overpowered in, or
biased
> > towards, the bass end and perhaps has a less responsive action than a
> > smaller piano.  If they also have to put up with a little noise perhaps
> that
> > comes with the territory.
>
> And then we wonder why their performances are sometimes mechanical. And
it's
> the main reason why I no longer worry about achieving a high level of
> 'power' in a given piano. Power will take care of itself. I'm much more
> concerned with the dynamic range and the bottom end performance.
>
>
> >
> > I think we have created an untenable situation with a concert hall that
> > holds thousands of people.  It's pretty hard to have an intimate musical
> > experience with an artist when he's seated several hundred feet away.
> > If we didn't insist on having recitals and concerts in spaces the size
of
> > football fields we wouldn't need to design pianos to fill them up.
>
> I think you're right. I wonder just what the optimum size for an
auditorium
> is considering the realistic performance potential of the modern piano. By
> that I mean one that is not stretched beyond its musical limits simply for
> the sake of 'projection.' I would guess one seating around 500 to 750.
But,
> again, I've done no definitive tests on this. Just some observations.
>
> Del
>