Fandrich re: 1920's pianos

[Delwin D Fandrich]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Armond" <armond@snip.net>
To: "Paino Technician Guild Members" <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: February 12, 2003 6:47 AM
Subject: armond re: 1920's pianos


>
> let's just say that the ultimate in available materials, craftsman, and
era
> timing to make fine pianos existed in the 1920's without a doubt.

The problem with statements like this is that there is little factual
foundation for them.

As a piano rebuilder/remanufacturer I've been inside too many so-called
world standard pianos to have unbounded respect for either the materials
used or for the craftsmanship exhibited in them. Both were competent to the
task and little more. And sometimes not that. Pianos like the Walter grand,
the modern Steinway and most of the modern European pianos are built using
materials that are at least as good as--in some cases better--than those
found in typical pianos from the 1920s. In those cases where materials equal
to those of the 1920s cannot readily be found, technology has given us many
options that are either equal to or, often, superior in performance.

In those cases where unsuitable materials are used today--the rim of Select
Hardwood comes to mind--they are used for the same reasons unsuitable
materials were sometimes used in the 1920s--a management decision has been
made to use them. Sometimes this is due to cost considerations, sometimes
ignorance. Again, just like the 1920s.

While it is certainly true that people entered the workforce with a
different set of skills--and, probably, a different work ethic--in the
1920s, I have seen little evidence to support the notion that the
'craftsmanship' of the era--at least as exhibited in the pianos build in the
era--was demonstratably superior to that seen in the pianos of today. (All
within equal price points, of course. Let's not be comparing Mason &
Hamlin's with Kimball's.) Consider the level of craftsmanship found in
pianos like the Walter, the modern Steinway (leaving out those of the 1950s
and up to, perhaps, the 1990s) and the bulk of the European pianos. Few, if
any, of the 1920s pianomakers could match, let alone surpass, the precision
with which a modern Schimmel or similar instrument is built. Or a Yamaha or
Kawai, for that.

And how else do we define craftsmanship? It doesn't matter to me if the
craftsmanship is accomplished by a fourth generation bellyman with a chisel
or an engineer/technician with a CNC machining center, bridge notching is
bridge notching.

And, as a student of piano design, I am appalled at the general lack of
foundational knowledge exhibited by many pianomakers of the 1920s. It
doesn't take a critical reading of books like "Piano Tone Building" or
William Braid White's "Theory and Practice of Pianoforte Building" to
realize just how inadequate their knowledge of what we would now consider to
be basic piano technology really was. And we are still stuck with some of
the unfortunate developments of that legacy--the compression-crowned
soundboard design, the hit-or-miss string scaling, the low tenor bridge
'hook' all come to mind. As a piano designer I know we can do better than
this using materials and craftsmanship available today. And, as a sometime
pianobuilder, I have demonstrated this.


>
> ....the accepted sound of the piano has changed, for the worse, in the
last 25
> years due to faster and cheaper manufacturing demands by those who own the
> companies....

Ah, now here we agree. The concept of piano tone has definitely changed over
the past 25 to 50 years and not for the better. And, yes, it has been
brought on by manufacturing expediencies, but it didn't have to be. It was
allowed to happen because we technicians didn't respond quickly enough and
forcefully enough to the change and call harsh, harsh and strident,
strident. We let it happen largely unchallenged. We allowed ourselves to be
bought and paid for by the heavy and slick marketing efforts of the
companies making the changes. We were afraid if we pointed out that the
Emperor's new clothing was somewhat transparent we'd lose the perks. And now
the industry--manufacturers, dealers and, to a large extent, the piano-aware
public--has become accustomed to harsh, strident sounding pianos of limited
dynamic depth and this has become the standard "piano" sound. Even to the
extent that Steinway is taking perfectly good resilient hammers--they really
do press a good hammer--and saturating them with chemical hardeners in an
attempt to emulate the sound of the hard, dense heat-pressed hammers of the
high-production era.

None of this, however, demonstrates a lack of craftsmanship or quality
materials. The hard-pressed, dense hammer may well be made with great felt
and be built to high quality standards--it's just not appropriate for use in
a piano. Rather, it demonstrates a lack of understanding on the part of the
builders, the sellers and, to a large extent, the buyers of the modern piano
about what the pianoforte was, should be and can be again. The piano has
simply transitioned from a musical instrument with which to express the soul
of the composer and/or artist to a manufactured product--a unit of
production.

The only time this becomes a problem is when the artist/musician purchases
one of these units assuming he or she is purchasing a pianoforte and is
expecting a pianoforte level of performance out of it. But, that's where we
come in...it keeps us in business. (Though it's not doing much for the
long-term health of the piano industry.)

Del
Delwin D Fandrich
Piano Designer & Builder
Hoquiam, Washington  USA
E.mail:  pianobuilders@olynet.com
Web Site:  www.pianobuilders.com