Interesting, I'd rather you'd answered my question though and pointed out the major differences you were implying between a modern Steinway and one of 1859.
Originally posted by Peter: Interesting, I'd rather you'd answered my question though and pointed out the major differences you were implying between a modern Steinway and one of 1859.
May I direct the gentleman to the Patent Office...
------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin
Originally posted by Peter: I don't need to go there to know that the changes are superficial and the basic design remains that of the 1859 patent no.26,532
My initial remark conserned more the nature of the sound and its playability, and it's the 'superficial' changes that make their presence felt here. However the list of patented modifications is a very large one. Schnabel observed a change in the Steinway...from unsatisfactory to less unsatisfactory.
------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin
Originally posted by Rod: My initial remark conserned more the nature of the sound and its playability, and it's the 'superficial' changes that make their presence felt here. However the list of patented modifications is a very large one. Schnabel observed a change in the Steinway...from unsatisfactory to less unsatisfactory.
There were major changes to the piano in B's lifetime and all the seeds of the modern piano were already there. Erard's repetition actions of 1808 and 1821, the expansion to seven octaves by the 1820's, the use of felt in 1826, the use of metal strengthening bars in 1821, the first complete iron frame in 1825. Some of these changes were in their experimental stage and had problems that were not resolved until the Steinway patent of 1859 which is regarded as the modern piano. After that date there have been further refinements (particularly with the damper action) but not as major as in the first 6 decades of the 19th century.
Originally posted by Peter: There were major changes to the piano in B's lifetime and all the seeds of the modern piano were already there. Erard's repetition actions of 1808 and 1821, the expansion to seven octaves by the 1820's, the use of felt in 1826, the use of metal strengthening bars in 1821, the first complete iron frame in 1825. Some of these changes were in their experimental stage and had problems that were not resolved until the Steinway patent of 1859 which is regarded as the modern piano. After that date there have been further refinements (particularly with the damper action) but not as major as in the first 6 decades of the 19th century.
I don't see the point of continuing this line of discussion. Regardless of what happened to the Steinway it is inadequate for Beethoven's music, it's not even your favourite. Looks like B's 1826 comment about the piano still remains true. Finis
------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin
[This message has been edited by Rod (edited 11-14-2001).]
Originally posted by Rod: I don't see the point of continuing this line of discussion. Regardless of what happened to the Steinway it is inadequate for Beethoven's music, it's not even your favourite. Looks like B's 1826 comment about the piano still remains true. Finis
OK, but a few final points -
The modern piano did not emerge from nowhere but was the product of a logical line of development - even if Beethoven was referring in 1826 to the durability and reliability of the instrument rather than the sound quality and technical abilities, then manufacturers were only responding to these demands. 'Remains an inadequate instrument' are not the words of someone who is satisfied and thinks no further developments to the piano should take place.
Originally posted by Peter: OK, but a few final points -
The modern piano did not emerge from nowhere but was the product of a logical line of development - even if Beethoven was referring in 1826 to the durability and reliability of the instrument rather than the sound quality and technical abilities, then manufacturers were only responding to these demands. 'Remains an inadequate instrument' are not the words of someone who is satisfied and thinks no further developments to the piano should take place.
'Plaudite , amici, comoedia finita est!'
Can't give you thae last word here, the pianos we are discussing are from two lines of development, not one. And I never said there should be no development - the Viennese school models (certainly Streichers and Bosendorfers) were ironically structurally very good by the time of their demise (circa 1860) due to the taste for ever increasing volume at the expense of other aesthetic factors. It is the English school model that has required the greatest amount of development, still ongoing! With regard to Beethoven's compositions (my only concern here) the subsequent development of these English actioned pianos is largely irrelevant, it is these 1860's Streicher and Bosendorfer instruments that are the end of the line for B's pianos.
------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin
Originally posted by Rod: Can't give you thae last word here, the pianos we are discussing are from two lines of development, not one. And I never said there should be no development - the Viennese school models (certainly Streichers and Bosendorfers) were ironically structurally very good by the time of their demise (circa 1860) due to the taste for ever increasing volume at the expense of other aesthetic factors. It is the English school model that has required the greatest amount of development, still ongoing! With regard to Beethoven's compositions (my only concern here) the subsequent development of these English actioned pianos is largely irrelevant, it is these 1860's Streicher and Bosendorfer instruments that are the end of the line for B's pianos.
That's fair enough but wouldn't it be better then to have performances of B's works on the 1860's Viennese models rather than those from the 1800's? Or is there little difference in the actual sound quality?
I find your duet on this subject very interesting Peter and Rod... please go on...
I would like to read that Rod prefers a 1860's Bösendorfer of course but...
Originally posted by Peter: That's fair enough but wouldn't it be better then to have performances of B's works on the 1860's Viennese models rather than those from the 1800's? Or is there little difference in the actual sound quality?
Unfortunately I haven't heard any of these instruments, so I don't know about the sound. From the Engish actioned 1854 Streicher I heard (used to play some Beethoven variations), I guess they would have sounded much like the late 1820's models, but with the capacity for extra volume. Regardless there is no problem as far as I am concerned with the sound of the Viennese pianos existant in B's time as far as his music is concerned. The issue here for me is more to do with the mechanical reliability of the instruments. Beethoven once complained to Streicher that a piano of that make then in B's posession (B's favoured brand) spent more time in the repair shop than he would have expected!
------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin
[This message has been edited by Rod (edited 11-19-2001).]
Comment