Hello Stephen & List Stephen says (inter alia): Michael suggested a revivalist approach based on historical "fortepianos" (I detect a certain fondness for and familiarity with English pianos in his postings from sunny sussex). Even though I think this is a non-starter, other than the lessons that can be learned by studying a wider spectrum, I would suggest turning to the late 19th century for guidance on specifics. My point, which you homed in on, was just as you said above. True I do have a fondness etc. for English pianos in all their oddities but I also share, it seems, an urge to develop the concept of those 19th.C. grand experiments. Once the overstringing became the norm (for whatever reason - usually cost and size I suppose) all development in straight - or oblique - stringing ceased. My thinking is based on the fore-runner of the frame (plate?) in the piano which was so similar to the harp in that the strings were parallel. I regularly service several olde grands - amongst them Broadwoods, Erards (French!) with their peculiar and usefully engineered under-damper actions, and Collard & Collard. This last maker (I am citing No.154652) is probably the most advanced in the straight-strung grands and maybe this is the point from which modern development could begin. Over to you from that sunny Sussex Downland village Michael G.(UK) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen Birkett" <sbirkett@real.uwaterloo.ca> To: "Pianotech" <pianotech@ptg.org> Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 6:18 AM Subject: Re: Piano Design Question > Michael: >>Are we tending toward a modern version of the Fortepiano? > > This would make no sense. Historical pianos met the needs - both musical > and societal - of the time they existed. They are what they were and we > can't turn back the clock. I believe there's a lot we can learn from them > in developing new concepts for what I like to call a post-modern piano, > but it would be pointless to try to revive that particular aesthetic (or > more accurately those particular aethetics), other than for the purpose of > reproducing the musical capabilities for period performance of > compositions associated with them. > >>The problem with that particular piano has ever been the "hanging on" >>since the dampers were totally inefficient by modern standards. That said >>Schubert, played on a Fortepiano, is a joy to hear! Schubert obviously >>used the defects of these pianos to his advantage. > > Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. These aren't defects. They are > exactly the characteristics considered desirable at the time. The end of > the sound was just as important as the beginning. To throttle it with > highly efficient dampers would have been considered plain crude. Just as > we shouldn't try to extrapolate their aesthetics forwards in time to > define our piano concept, extrapolating our aesthetics backwards is not > valid either. > >>But I digress from the subject - that of producing a new piano with its >>very own distinctive sound - a sound which is acceptable to modern ears >>and sensibilities. > > Definitely. This is my objective. And I'm pleased to be living in a time > enlightened enough that it makes sense to do this, even commercial sense > as we've seen from the mavericks like Del, Ron O, W. Stuart, etc., as well > as the countless techs who constantly endeavor to tweak the existing raw > material into more desirable states by retrofitting, retro-adjusting, and > re-building. > > The key here is choice, first and foremost. > > Ric: >>That said, again we are confronted with this matter of what sounds >><<best>>. > > Michael suggested a revivalist approach based on historical "fortepianos" > (I detect a certain fondness for and familiarity with English pianos in > his postings from sunny sussex). Even though I think this is a > non-starter, other than the lessons that can be learned by studying a > wider spectrum, I would suggest turning to the late 19th century for > guidance on specifics. The inexorable cross-strung forced march during the > last quarter of the 19th century, and total submission to this single > design concept during the 20th century, overshadows the hints of other > possibilities that existed (like the small rodents in the undergrowth > while the dinosaurs roamed). We should turn our attention to the wonderful > French straight-strung grands, e.g. Erards of 1900, for guidance. And ask > the question which direction would these have taken had they been able to > develop through the 20th century. Combine this sort of thinking with > sophisticated manufacturing and materials. That's where we're heading with > our post-modern piano. > >>>.....and I'll admit to a point (and only to a point) that these >>>preferences are coloured by fashion, and traditions. Which makes it all >>>the more difficult to get at any real meaningfull definitions of what >>><<is>> optimal piano sound. > > No point in trying to do that. There is no optimal. Aesthetic quality > needs to be assessed in a context relative to the ambient culture. In that > sense, the 20th century piano met the needs of the time perfectly. It > clearly is no longer doing that as well as it did so now we can ask what > else we could have. The change in the market conditions, and other > external pressures (e.g. electronics), also give impetus to this, now that > the entire industry isn't being supported artificially by cheap, > mass-produced, living room uprights. This is a good time to try to restore > some sort of real variety and real choice into the piano market (not just > the same old thing wrapped up and packaged in different boxes with > different legs). > > Without fashion and tradition we have no drivers and no products, but this > causality can be made to work in both directions as any successful > entrepreneur will tell you. The trick is to be clever enough to manipulate > fashion into ways you consider to be desirable, or, even better, provide > such a drop down, knockout, and inexpensive product, with enough clearly > evident advantages that can't be ignored, that the market is pulled along > for the ride. In other words you teach them what is good for them and then > provide it. > > Stephen > -- > Dr Stephen Birkett > Piano Design Lab > Department of Systems Design Engineering > University of Waterloo, Waterloo ON Canada N2L 3G1 > tel: 519-888-4567 Ext. 3792 > Lab room E3-3160 Ext. 7115 > mailto: sbirkett[at]real.uwaterloo.ca > http://real.uwaterloo.ca/~sbirkett >
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC