News:

If you have difficulty registering for an account on the forum please email antespam@gmail.com. In the question regarding the composer use just the surname, not including forenames Charles-Marie.

Main Menu

Pianos and acoustics - split from Town hall organs

Started by AnOrganCornucopia, December 31, 2011, 06:20:09 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

AnOrganCornucopia

Quote from: David Pinnegar on December 30, 2011, 02:53:34 PMThe signal, often listened to in a car, has to overcome... a noise level much higher than previous generations have experienced. To them, pianissimos were audible and made impact in themselves whilst fortissimos were positively deafening, now drowned out by nightclub computermusik. Most pianists nowadays especially out of college don't know how to play pianissimo and bash the piano too hard - and modern Steinways, Yamahas, Bosendorfers and all the rest are very politely tolerant to such playing even if unmusical it remains.

I wonder if this deafness to pianissimo and lessened sensitivity to fortissimo explains why most improvisers these days think it's necessary to start at F and build the volume from there to FFF and keep it there for the rest of the improv...

Regarding your comment on modern pianos being tolerant to such unmusical playing, I disagree. Most modern Steinways, by virtue of their very short-stringed top end and sharp tuning (and resultant overly bright tone) sound ghastly unless played with a very light touch. There are a few 'special' ones which can take a bit more (I know two personally) but most aren't that good. Yamahas are similarly bright so again hammering causes problems. Bösendorfers seem most tolerant: with their rich, mellow tone, they can take a bit more and just produce more volume. As it is, 'my' 5ft 10in Bösendorfer grand (vintage 1917 - didn't the Viennese have other things on their mind then?!) produces more volume, played well, than any of the modern Steinways I know (the two 'special' ones I mentioned, a Model B and a Model D, plus a much more ordinary D) - and a Danish friend of mine who has historically had a heavy touch (this is gradually being excised!) manages to drown out even his own bellowing with the tremendous roar of this instrument (it really is an astonishing sound for such an average-sized piano).

This mad Viking, having encountered 'mine', went straight out and bought a 9ft 6 'Imperial' (complete with compass extension to 32ft C) for his sitting room... you can imagine what THAT sounded like when he was playing Rachmaninov or Liszt! It's a big sitting room but it's hardly the Musikverein... The Imperial has now been sold to a large church in Denmark, which I'm told it fills admirably. In its place sits a much smaller Fazioli - it's a nice piano but not as special IMO as a comparable Bösendorfer.

What sets the Vienna-made King of Pianos apart from all other makers is its silken, luscious pianissimo. The top end is very long (which is why Bösendorfers are bulkier than most pianos of their overall width and length) and so still produces volume with an ultra-light touch that would get nothing out of a Steinway. Also, each multi-strung note has separate strings: Steinway, like most makers, use one string and coil it round the tuning pins multiple times. Bösendorfers are easier to tune (and are more stable) as a result - or so says my excellent piano tech friend.

If you've never heard a Bösendorfer pianissimo, I'm not sure recordings can reproduce it, but imagine if you will the pianistic equivalent of listening to something pleasant being played on the soft stops of an E. M. Skinner organ. I describe it as being like taking a bath in a tub-full of gently-warmed whipped cream. I could listen to Debussy on 'my' piano all day long...

revtonynewnham

Hi
Part of the issue is the rather high level of ambient noise these days - even if you live in the country, and it's far worse in cities.  Plus the effect of background Muzak in many places (and I must admit I usually listen to music while I'm working) - but all of this leads to a reduction in the ability to hear quiet sounds easily.  Also, we have become used to amplified sound - so there is rarely the need to listen to distant voices/music.

I certainly agree that Steinways are over rated - give me a Bosendorfer Imperial any day (but then, where would I put it?).

Every  Blessing

Tony

David Drinkell

Quote from: AnOrganCornucopia on December 31, 2011, 06:20:09 AM
....each multi-strung note has separate strings: Steinway, like most makers, use one string and coil it round the tuning pins multiple times. Bösendorfers are easier to tune (and are more stable) as a result - or so says my excellent piano tech friend.

I don't quite understand what you're describing here - could you elaborate, please?  It's very interesting, but I can't quite visualise it!

During both of my last two jobs, the respective churches were donated Steinways - I never took to either, although that may well be more my fault than that of the instrument.  The first one was a massively heavy (weight and tone-wise) upright (the previous owner also had a Broadwood and a Bluthner, either of which I would have preferred, especially the Broadwood).  The second was a small grand, the previous owner of which, being in her late eighties, wished it to go to somewhere where it would be appreciated as none of her relatives wanted it.  She had been personally to the factory and selected it when it was new and had kept it in mint condition.  The tuner said he felt as if he should pay us for the privilege of maintaining it.  And yet......I knew it was a fine instrument but I never took to it.  The Vicar Choral, who is a much better pianist than I am, thought it was marvellous and spent hours on it. 

When I had to go out looking for an upright for accompanying rehearsals, I fell in love with, and bought, a Challen.  It was perfect for what I wanted - I guess I lack the gift of regarding a piano as anything but a work-horse.

revtonynewnham

Hi

Most modern pianos use one length of wire for two adjacent strings - at least in the trebles (tri-chords), relying on the friction around the pins away from the tuning pins to retain the pitch.  A few use one wire with a loop at the end per string.  There are probably pros and cons to each method - I've no real experience to make a comment.

Challens are very nice pianos in their range - probably among the best.  I used to have an old Challen upright that I was given - a very nice instrument, but sadly, in the end it just needed a total rebuild, which was beyond my means.

Every Blessing

Tony

David Pinnegar

Hi!

It looks as though we should start a thread for pianos in public spaces . . . !

It's very helpful to be pointed towards Challen as a recommendation when asked for advice.

I used to joke that every note on a Steinway was an interruption of the music, but under the hands of Steinway artist Adolfo Barabino that's far from the case. However, they can be variable in a strange aspect. This year I tuned two and, using unequal temperament, I can make bass harmonics of a piano accord exactly with their relevant harmonic counterparts in the tuning octave. This means that the instrument becomes more than a collection of notes and the whole is more than the sum of the parts.

In order to study this I have been looking at inharmonicity measurements of the instruments. A small grand Steinway in Genoa had the smoothest most even progression of inharmonics from string to string that I have ever measured, whilst the other Steinway was much more random. This sounds technical but it's not. A true tone is made up of a fundamental note and exact multiples of that frequency above it. But iron bars, belss, strings, and especially hit strings have variations of the upper harmonics away from their true frequencies. When, as in the Genoa Steinway, these variations progress from string to the next string in an orderly fashion, the result that one achieves when tuning them into the tuning scheme is truly beautiful.

Best wishes

David P

pcnd5584

#5
Quote from: AnOrganCornucopia on December 31, 2011, 06:20:09 AM
I wonder if this deafness to pianissimo and lessened sensitivity to fortissimo explains why most improvisers these days think it's necessary to start at F and build the volume from there to FFF and keep it there for the rest of the improv...

Richard, it is better to avoid making unsubstatiated generalisations.

I have an extensive collection of recorded improvisations, extending over many years, featuring a good number of artists. I have also listened to a number of others improvise live (in addition to improvising myself several times, each Sunday). However, I would never dream of making such a statement myself.

In fact, only this morning at Mass, I improvised quietly for several minutes, on a number of appropriate themes. It is true that the Sortie was generally loud (and quite appropriately so) - but it was also quite short.
Pierre Cochereau rocked, man

dragonser

Hi,
I think a new topic would be appropriate. it is most interesting to know about how measurements of the Harmonics and their inharmonisity when they relate to Pianos and how it may affect their perceived sound.
I'm assuming that the harmonics of a Harpsichord don't deviate from the harmonic frequencies like the harmonics do of a Piano ?
I can see that depending how the strings on a Piano are coupled [ I mean if a single length of wire is used for each note, or if a single length of wire is used for two adjacent notes, with a common hook ] , then the coupling between the two strings will be different.

regards Peter B


Quote from: David Pinnegar on January 01, 2012, 10:33:17 AM
Hi!

It looks as though we should start a thread for pianos in public spaces . . . !

It's very helpful to be pointed towards Challen as a recommendation when asked for advice.


In order to study this I have been looking at inharmonicity measurements of the instruments. In a small grand Steinway in Genoa  these variations progress from string to the next string i

Best wishes

David P

revtonynewnham

Hi

From what I've read, the non-harmonic components in piano tone are a result of the string material - and in the bass also down to the additional thickness of the strings to keep the length manageable - extra thickness (and the over-winding) add mass and stiffness, altering the theoretical vibration pattern.

I think that harpsichords usually use thinner strings at a lower tension.  I guess there are still some non-harmonic components to the sound (discounting any transients from the "pluck") but their effect will be different - and perhaps less pronounced - than on a piano.

Every Blessing

Tony

David Pinnegar

Quote from: revtonynewnham on January 02, 2012, 10:12:07 AM
From what I've read, the non-harmonic components in piano tone are a result of the string material - and in the bass also down to the additional thickness of the strings to keep the length manageable - extra thickness (and the over-winding) add mass and stiffness, altering the theoretical vibration pattern.

I think that harpsichords usually use thinner strings at a lower tension. 

Vibrations start to have inharmonic components when the width of a resonator becomes significant in relation to the length, providing path lengths through internal reflection that start to be significantly different to the primary longtitudinal length. Piano strings are much thicker than harpsichord strings.

Colin Pykett reminded us on posts last year on this forum that Fourier harmonic analysis, proposing that any waveshape could be synthesised from a harmonic series of precise multiples of a fundamental depended on the assumption that the sound was of infinite duration. As soon as the sounds become dying away Bessel functions are needed to describe the waveform, resulting in inharmonic components.

In discussion among piano experts, I have seen mention of piano sound dying at the rate of 1/Tsquared in contrast to harpsichords which decay at 1/T. Why this should be I have no idea!

Perhaps someone might elucidate here.

Best wishes

David P

dragonser

Hi,
I think that the comments about Harpsichords using generally lighter gauge wire than Pianos is correct. I have seen mention of using brass wire on some Harpsichords, and I guess the question of what wire was used on historical instruments  is also a good one ?
I don't know if the difference in the decay of the sound on each instrument is down to the difference in " pluck " [ I mean hammers versus jacks ] or down to the thickness of strings, or down to other construction differences. I will investigate on line and see if there are any helpful web sites that explain it.
regards Peter B