Brian Trout wrote: > Hi Richard, > > Several things I differ with... > > 1) "Put it back the way you found it." > Maybe that's the way I did my very first jobs, but it didn't take long to > grow outta that one. I feel like part of what I do in "rewhatevering" is to > make it better than it was. There are some jobs, however, especially with > Steinway pianos, where the customer will insist that it be "put back the way > it would have originally been built". I'd really rather try to do better > than that if I have anything to say about it. Given my choice, I do not > generally leave the bass bridge where it was or the scaling the same, leave > the bridge notching for some angle other than 90 deg to the string, or > compression crown a soundboard... > Given all that.... do you "put" the Steinway name and decal back the way you found it ? Not that I object to basically totally re-designing the instrument.... but if you do.... how do you justify calling it a Steinway ?.... It's easily as much a Trout by then eh ? > > 2) The general idea that "the piano makers of old knew much more than we > know and we should respect their work by restoring as it was." Although I > will admit that some of the trial and error that took place did, on > occasion, result in pleasant sounding pianos, I believe that we can do > better than "hit and miss"... or "put it back as was." No problem with this really.... tho I dont think we should take it for granted that the ancient ones simply played a game of hit and miss. Theirs what a different world... and we are not nearly as familiar with that as perhaps we'd like to think. > > 3) The general idea that "strings of different length within the same unison > add color and body to the tone." Some may have believed that. Some may > still believe that. I don't particularly like the effect that it has on the > overall tone of the piano. To my ear, it adds a harshness, a sharpness that > is not pleasant. I like smooth and mellow. Others may disagree. It's my > preference, which I would not wish to impose on anyone. That,,,, was the jist of my last post. I dont like the effect either when it comes down to it. But then I dont like tuning unisions ever so slightly out of tune either. But I know several fine musicians that like that kind of sound... I know several who like the sound of a certain amount of falseness in general... false beats, wangyness... the works.. to them... this brings life to an instrument. Thats cool... what ever turns you on... or what ? This is another reason why I think we need to be a bit carefull about what we define as "better". > Just a few random thoughts to throw out. Don't know if that answers your > question or not, Richard. I'm sure if you're going to Dallas in July, we'll > have lots of new input to soak up in Del's class! :-) I do like Del's > class. We get to think outta the box. Wont be making Dallas, and Chicago last year was not a dooer either. The Home Security Service (HSS) makes it waaaayyy to much a pain in the patootey for me to travel to the US for the time being. And besides... I'd like to spend some time and energy getting Del to do a class at one of our conventions. We had great fun with David Stanwood and Roger Jolly this past October. Perhaps in 2004 I'll do another US trip and take in a convention. They are great fun and I enjoy seeing you folks....even if it is for just a few hours in the rush. > > Take care, > > Brian Likewise ! RicB -- Richard Brekne RPT, N.P.T.F. UiB, Bergen, Norway mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no http://home.broadpark.no/~rbrekne/ricmain.html
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC