Fandrich re: 1920's pianos

[Ron Overs]

At 12:08 PM -0800 12/2/03, Delwin D Fandrich wrote:
>----- 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.

  Indeed, so often we hear these comments. I really don't subscribe to 
there every being a 'magic' period of piano making. There will always 
be all manner of work, from the sloppy to the particular, in any age.

>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.

Absolutely. We recently overhauled a Rönisch upright. These pianos 
have quite a reputation in Australia as a quality instrument. When I 
observe an A1 - C88 strike scale spread of 127 cm, causing the key 
sticks to be splayed all over the shop, it makes me wonder what some 
of these 'golden age' designers were thinking about while they were 
standing at the drawing board, since it doesn't seem to have been 
good piano design.

>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.

Absolutely, its the end result that counts, not the road that is 
trodden to achieve it.

>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.

Indeed, and sound board area allocations that seem to defy common sense.

>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.

Indeed, some of the modern factory administrators are so bereft of a 
real understanding of what constitutes good design, that they remain 
incapable of having the discretion to know good design when they fall 
right over it. There's nothing quite so frustrating as trying to 
explain a concept to a senior factory person only to find that the 
shutters are well and truly down - no-one is home. Sometimes it just 
makes you feel like allowing mediocrity to rule - it probably will 
anyhow.

Ron O.

-- 
_______________________

OVERS PIANOS - SYDNEY
Grand Piano Manufacturers

Web: http://overspianos.com.au
mailto:info@overspianos.com.au
_______________________