Real Customizing of a piano

[David Love]

I think Del is right: it really starts with the scale.  The scale suggests
the weight of the soundboard (along with the rim, i.e., heavier rim means
you can make a lighter soundboard), the scale and soundboard suggest the
style and weight of the hammer, though you can clearly make a choice
(sometimes a bad one) as some companies, in my opinion, do.  Put them
together and therein lies the character of the piano. I don't think it's
anything magical or mysterious or something hidden in a small vile of fairy
dust unique to each manufacturer and sprinkled secretly onto the piano in
the middle of the night.  It might be fun to think it's magical and
mysterious, but it isn't.  Take a Steinway and two other makers of pianos
who basically have the same style rim--let's say heavy, bent hardwood and
bellyrail; whose plates allow the same bridge layout and scale; move that
Steinway soundboard to any of those other two and along with it the set of
hammers and I think you will be hard pressed (little hammer joke hidden
there) to tell any difference.  The devil is in the details, of course, and
the changes being made to these pianos that have prompted so much discussion
are, in my view, designed to accomplish three main things.  First, a more
predictable outcome by removing most of the dependence on the
unpredictability both in the short and long term of spruce panel
compression.  Second, a scale that creates a unified instrument from top to
bottom and a soundboard that responds adequately and smoothly to the
changing needs from low frequency to high frequency.  Third, a controlled
balance between power and sustain, two aspects which are somewhat at odds.
Everything else is really subsumed under those three headings, at least as I
see it.  

Back to the original point about the scale.  Probably more can be done to
change the character of a piano by changing the scale than anything else.
Years ago I recall a string maker who offered to rescale pianos complete as
part of their service.  Their tendency was to simply push up the tensions by
a fair amount.  The results were often quite poor.  Why?  Imagine an old
Steinway soundboard, now a bit weaker than it was.  Load it up with a higher
tension scale.  That old somewhat tired board can't handle that.  It can
barely handle the original scale anymore.  The energy transfer from the
higher tension scale tends to overwhelm it.  It gets louder as the board
wants to move more easily when energy is imparted to it.  But it's also tied
down more--unequal springs.  The result: a real percussive and choked sound.
If anything, to maintain some equilibrium, the scale (or bearing) should
have been backed off a bit (of course, usually a collapsing crown
accomplishes that for you--less bearing that is).  Anyway, I am digressing.


The scale changes being made on many of these redesigns are not significant
in this way.  More, they are smoothed out and balanced, sometimes the bass
end tensions are lowered somewhat, and the relationship between core and
wrap dimensions are changed.  But the overall scale tensions remains roughly
the same.  All other changes are adopted in an attempt to unify and balance
that tone building tripartite of scale, soundboard and hammer.  It's a
beautiful and simple concept, and one which seems to have been forgotten.  

But the most important thing:  3 under par on the back nine today, oh yeah! 

David Love
davidlovepianos at comcast.net 
www.davidlovepianos.com

-----Original Message-----
From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf
Of Fenton Murray
Sent: Sunday, July 06, 2008 1:21 PM
To: Pianotech List
Subject: Re: Real Customizing of a piano

Thanks Dave,
What's probably more important to me than identifying, as I originally made 
point to, or agreeing whether there is or is not 'the Steinway sound', is 
identifying specific points within that (or any) piano's sound that are 
buried deep in the belly, and then learning how to manipulate and control 
and ultimately improve them. This is probably a much better direction for 
this thread. There is so much collective experience on this subject with in 
the list, I just love it when the tap opens up.
As you said " I think that if someone were to line up 30 Steinways from
their customer base and, not knowing that they were all Steinway, was asked
to identify the maker of each one, the odds of them saying Steinway 30 times
would be somewhere between slim and none--and Slim's on vacation as the
saying goes. "
Certainly true, I mean with hundreds of brands, Slim's on vacation. There's 
a red available in a little winery down south in San Miguel that's about 
$25. a bottle, a Barbera, I like to get a bottle when I'm down there, then 
we go to Morro Bay and have it on the beach with some BBQ. Gotta have that 
Barbera, now, if you slipped me a bottle of Thunderbird and put the other 
label on, I think I'd now. But, Steinway's are no way as consistent as this 
wine. Guess I made your point.
Fenton

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Love" <davidlovepianos at comcast.net>
To: "'Pianotech List'" <pianotech at ptg.org>
Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2008 1:46 PM
Subject: RE: Real Customizing of a piano


> To get back to Fenton's original question I think the difficulty in 
> claiming
> that we can identify a "Steinway" sound is that we don't really have the
> double blind study with a variety of pianos in various states to 
> demonstrate
> whether we really can or can't.  I find Steinway pianos producing all 
> sorts
> of variety of tone depending for the most part on the condition of the 
> board
> and also the type and/or condition of the hammers.  I've pulled off hard
> pressed hammers for customers who claimed that it didn't produce a
> "Steinway" sound.  I've also encountered soundboard responses that defy 
> any
> maker's identity.  It's also true that customer's identification of and
> requests for the "Steinway" sound are as varied as the tone that the 
> pianos
> actually produce under various conditions.
>
> We may have a mental concept of what a Steinway sound is and shoot for 
> that
> accepting the best we can get depending on what the state of affairs is 
> with
> the piano in general.  I would presume that concept is taken from what we
> liked the best (which may vary from tech to tech) and so aim for that as
> some model.  Even then, the model we conceive of is fleeting and changes 
> as
> soon as we begin to recognize just what any particular piano might or 
> might
> not deliver.  I think that if someone were to line up 30 Steinways from
> their customer base and, not knowing that they were all Steinway, was 
> asked
> to identify the maker of each one, the odds of them saying Steinway 30 
> times
> would be somewhere between slim and none--and Slim's on vacation as the
> saying goes.  At least that's my hypothesis.  Now if someone wants to set 
> up
> a double blind study to test that hypothesis, I'll be happy to put in a 
> good
> word on the grant proposal.
>
> As Ron suggests, what's great in all this is the idea of better control 
> over
> outcomes (and nuances), targeting a very specific tonal model, and 
> choosing
> a consistent set of components to achieve that on a consistent basis.  For
> me, scale and soundboard design issues are really the most interesting 
> thing
> happening in piano technology right now with the greatest potential for
> redefining how we look at the instrument itself.
>
> David Love
> davidlovepianos at comcast.net
> www.davidlovepianos.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On 
> Behalf
> Of Ron Nossaman
> Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2008 12:19 PM
> To: Pianotech List
> Subject: Re: Real Customizing of a piano
>
>
>
>> Just wait until my 6'4" Knabe is done with a modified (Steinway like
> scale)
>> and a bunch of other changes.  A III or Knabe?  Only the decal knows for
>> sure.
>>
>> David Love
>
>
> There's a 5'8" or thereabouts Knabe player in my shop waiting
> for me to finish the school related projects and get back to
> it, that so far, with the old thoroughly worn out action, has
> a sound I think any new M would be proud of. This is just way
> cool stuff.
> Ron N
>
>
>
>