Talk:Piano/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

A glib too far

a baby grand is not for musicians, rather people wishing to be seen to own a grand piano

While I completely approve of the supercilious tone, maybe this is a glib too far - John Cage, at least, had a baby grand (a Steinway model O, since you ask - he wrote his Sonatas and Interludes on it) and while many might not call him a musician, I don't think he cared much about being the big shot with the grand piano either ;) --Camembert

Yup, I thought it was a bit much even as I wrote it. Go ahead and tone it down -- I just wanted to remove the bit about "grand pianos are too large for domestic use" -- I have one :-) (model O isn't "baby", it's a 6-footer)-- Tarquin

Hmm, I was parrotting back what I'd read in some CD booklet about the model O - I guess they mean it's "baby" compared to a model D. That'll teach me. --Camembert

The nifty lid on Bosendorfers

I just added the bit about the lid on sub-bass notes on Bosendorfers (something which amused me no end when I was at college). Does anybody know for sure if all Bosendorfers with extended bass ranges have the nifty lid to cover the keys? I've only ever seen two, both of which did, but I have something in the back of my mind telling me they're not all like that. --Camembert

I've played Bosendorfers, but I don't remember the lid. They're wow -- really wow. I was about 14 and learning a piece by Ginastera that involved lots of hammering in the lower octaves. The action is spectacular (the sound's great too, but as a pianist it's the feedback I care about) They're the only thing better than a Steinway. Anyone can have a grand piano in their home, providing they give up a trivial luxury such as a bed ;-) -- Tarquin 22:34 Nov 8, 2002 (UTC)

I saw such a lid on the additional 4 bass keys of a 7'4" Bosendorfer from the 1960s, and I know they used to add it on the 9'6 Imperial for some time. It definitely looks somewhat goofy. Today, these models come without the lid. The additional bass keys are colored black to avoid confusion. Also, at the Imperial, the Bosendorfer logo on the fallboard is centered to the usual 88 keys, not to the full keyboard, thus moving it some inches to the right. luckyjo Dec 28, 20042

One of my old teachers would sing the praises of Bosendorfers at every possible opportunity - he always used to cite this one particular Schumann song ("Ich grolle nicht", from the Dichterliebe) where the left hand plays a descending scale in octaves that goes down to the bottom A and then has to jump up an octave to carry on with the scale - "now," he'd say "with a Bosendorfer, you just flip up this little lid, and there's nine extra keys so you can play it properly!" Never got to play one myself, unfortunately - they don't let pianists as poor as me within twelve feet of the things :) --Camembert

Grouse spotted

All right, gang, this page needs work because it's disorganized, and lacks perspective. There's a bunch of minutae, yet important historical milestones are unaddressed. Further, there is considerable need for some context inasmuch as the piano played a key role in the devlopment of western music as well as having social impact in many ways. Finally, there is a series of articles on keyboard instruments with which proper linkage and division of infomation must be made. For example, the physical layout of the keyboard and its relation to the scale could best be described in the keyboard instruments article, keyboard instruments I believe. The player piano is a phenomenon in its own right and is deserving of more comprehensive treatment or its own...

I did what I could but I have other Matters to Attend To at the Moment. I'll try to work on some of this later... Kat

sounds like a great idea! but remember, article titles are in the singular, so there may already be keyboard instrument. -- Tarquin 18:31 2 Jun 2003 (UTC)

We already have player piano, too (it's linked to from this article). I have some notes somewhere on the development of the piano from its invention to Broadwood (or thereabouts), but, to be honest, it's not something I particularly relish writing about - looking froward to your work on this, Kat! --Camembert

Why are uprights less responsive?

I have removed this text from the main article:

Secondly, because the hammers are travelling horizontally, a more complicated mechanism and more time is required to return them to their rest position, so an upright piano is not capable of playing repeated notes as rapidly.

To fit in the full length of the bass strings without making the piano too tall, these are sharply angled diagonally across the body of the piano. This also affects sound quality as the hammers do not strike parallel to the string, and causes problems in tuning due to the stresses on the frame at the transition point between string groups.

Furthermore, the left-hand pedal's una corda function -- which on grand pianos moves the entire action, thereby making the hammers strike one string instead of three -- isn't possible, because the differences in string angle would not allow a consistent reduction in tone quality across the range of notes.

The first statement is patent nonsense; the difference in repeated notes is due to the 'simpler' wipens without the repeat spring. While the second statement sounds plausible, I have never encountered any corroborating statements in my reading, and consider it suspect because of its proximity to the first.

Kat 19:41 25 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I wrote most of the above, as far as I can remember. Firsat statement: I've been told that because on a grand the hammers only fall back, the repeat action is easier. I could be misinformed. Which are you calling the second statement? It's certainly true that the strings are at an angle to the hammers. It's also certainly true that the una corda is fact isn't, and therefore isn't as good. What are you contesting? -- Tarquin 19:49 25 Jul 2003 (UTC)

<<repeating action on grands>> I have a couple print books here, "Piano Servicing, Tuning, & Rebuilding" and "Piano Roles", Parakilas et al. Both have good descriptions of the repeating action, its evolution, and effect on playing. One makes mention of the handful of uprights that have been built with such actions. The conversations I have had with the tuners, rebuilders, technicians, teachers, and performers over the years corroborate these written sources.

<<una corda>> Well, as they say, it's not the quid or the quo that's giving me trouble, but rather the pro. ;) Yes, the uprights lack a true una corda. Yes, the strings are at an angle. But are these facts related? Strings in a grand are at an angle as well, and a fairly acute one on some of the really short grands. In contrast, the strings aren't angled all that much in a large upright, particularly not the treble strings where the una corda has its greatest effect.

67.2.178.87 00:46 26 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Overselling uprights?

I don't understand "The very best upright pianos are comparable in sound quality and responsiveness to grand pianos of the same size." Surely no upright is "the same size" as a grand - that's the point of an upright, isn't it? --Camembert

I was referring to instruments where the speaking length of the longest strings is comparable. Steinway makes a fine studio upright, and I have played examples of them. These instruments sit about five feet high. Their string length is roughly comparable to that of a six foot (long) grand, since the length of a grand piano includes the keyboard. While not the equal of a concert instrument, the best uprights play well and have good sound. They are occasionally used in recording studios that do not have room for a grand. I believe that one of the European makers is said to make an upright considerably better than what we have available to us here in the Land of the Free and Right to Arm Bears, but I've never played the continental uprights. Kat 01:59 26 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I had always assumed it went like this: strings at an angle to make them as long as possible -> una corda not possible, as shifting the hammers would make them miss some strings -> fake una corda used -> it sounds crummy. I think at least the last connection is right -- Tarquin 08:13 26 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I simply don't agree with your first connection. Leaving aside the lack of corroboration in the literature for the moment, let's just consider the construction of an upright.

In a grand, the action is removable. It sits on glides that allow the whole thing to slide left and right, and it can be readily removed from the instrument. The dampers are separate and remain in the piano. Because of the seperate, one-piece nature of the grand action, it is easy to design it to move back and forth for an una corda effect. The strings on a grand run at an angle, yet the una corda effect works fine.

In an upright, the dampers are an integral part of the action, and while the whole thing can be removed, it bolts into place and can't be made to slide back and forth because the dampers would no longer align with the strings. The string angles in an upright are no more of a problem than they are in a grand.

Una corda an anachronism?

With your last connection, you're leading into the Land of Piano Pedalling Discussion, from which few return. Many serious pianists consider the una corda an anachronism that dates from the times when there was a lesser degree of dynamic control available through changes in touch at the keyboard. While there is a change in timbre on a fine grand, the importance of this, and its musical relevance in the standard repertiore, is questionable. This topic and ones related are subjects of much discussion over at news:rec.music.makers.piano.

Kat 02:55 27 Jul 2003 (UTC)

---

I wrote a bit about the soft pedal at mute (music) - I don't know if it would be best moved here, duplicated, merged, whatever. --Camembert

What is a 'sound field'?

Thanks, Karada; I had rather imagined that digital piano designers would be working on the sympathetic vibration problem, but I don't know this area.

I'm curious about "sound field"--what is it? Can you fill in the article for which you've made a link?

Opus33 19:02, 16 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Tweaks

• Voicing and regulation images now credited to the Schimmel company
• Correct the link to Yamaha Corporation (It's now two companies, motorcycles having been spun off.)
• Uprights and digitals are no longer described as being as just good as grands. I don't think this view corresponds to expert opinion.
• Plastic parts in Kawai pianos said by Larry Fine (who gets input from many other technicians) to be quite acceptable
• Prepared piano now has its own article and doesn't need to be discussed at length in piano.
• Remove a copyrighted image.
• Editorial bits

Opus33 17:55, 12 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Piano lists

Is there a list of composers and compositions for the piano? Broken down by style, nationality, time period, etc, just like how there's an "authors" list?

Not on the Wikipedia as far as I'm aware, no, though it may be interesting to have one as a sort of overview of piano repertoire. The closest thing we have is list of composers, which is just a general list. Feel free to start something! --Camembert

Picture

Did the piano in the first picture belong to someone special? It looks like its in a museum. 68.33.8.107

I've taken this up with the photo's creator. Let's hope some light can be shed on this. 82.92.119.11 21:29, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

hmm afraid I don't know the speifics, I think the piano is 19th century but don't know the maker. It's part of a historical collection of pianos owned by Bristol City Museum. --Imran 00:26, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This piano might appropriately fit into the later section of the article that covers history, but I don't think it's right for the "up front" picture, which should be a "canonical" piano. Perhaps someone competent in digital photography could find a nice, standard-looking black concert grand and take a picture of it? Opus33 15:18, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

THe picture of the upright piano is definitely not appropriate to be up front. It is in no way representable of a modern piano. It belongs in a museum. Also, the quality of the photos in this entry is very poor. Couldn't it be possible to find some better pictures? - Rich

No offense to the taker of that picture, but that piano blows. Get someone to take a black concert piano, as said above, with view of as many of the essential elements as possible. (top open, keyboard visible, pedals if possible) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.112.94.174 (talk • contribs) 12 May 2006.

Action Diagrams

Can someone who knows how pianos work provide diagrams of the action of upright and grand pianos? Maybe even animated GIFs that show what happens when a key is pressed?

[upright action diagram grand action diagram

• animated GIF's are supposedly in process.

Page move to pianoforte

I just reverted an cut-and-paste page move of this page to pianoforte, by an anonymous user, for the following reasons:

1. when you cut and paste a page into another empty page, you leave behind the talk page, as well as the edit history (you need to use the "move page" link);
2. I feel that a move as dramatic as this, which creates a spectacular number of redirects, should be at least discussed here prior to being done.

While I think that there is a justification for moving the page to pianoforte (for example, the Grove Dictionary has the article under that title), I'd like a bit of consensus on it first. What does anyone else think about the idea? I'm fine with the page under either title. Antandrus 23:02, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I think, going along with Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names)—which I do agree with—it should stay at piano. Looking forward to hear any other opinions tho --Sketchee 04:13, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)

Hmm, considering the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names), it does seem that piano is the better title, since it is by far the more common word for the thing. Antandrus 04:21, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Language is a motile organism. Common usage is the rule of the day here: we no longer refer to these instruments as claviers anymore, do we? --bleh fu talk fu 15:56, Feb 20, 2005 (UTC)

Curiouser and curiouser: Piano not pianoforte is undoubtedly the correct headword for this article, in fact my belief is that the English language has now moved to the point that the words are no longer even synonyms, see the new stub at pianoforte. Andrewa 20:06, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Non-neutral bias of damper pedal

The damper pedal is often simply called "the pedal," since it is the most important.

Is it really the "most important" or is it just the most used? What about the other pedals? Aren't they important, too?

"most often used" would be better than "most important", I agree. That una corda is pretty darn important when you need it. Antandrus 16:12, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The actual range

A modern piano is supposed to have 88 keys - 7 1/3 octaves, but on this page it says the keys range from A0 to C7, while on the Piano key frequencies page it says they range from A1 to C9. Which one is correct?'

Neither; the piano keys range from A0 to C8. I'll fix it.

Note that middle C is "C4". There is another system in use, especially in the world of electronic keyboards and MIDI--the "Yamaha" system--in which Middle C is "C3". Antandrus 22:32, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Boston link

The Boston link could do with updating to point to the appropriate Boston article, but I'm not sure which it is. --John 23:10, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Fixed; the New Grove had the answer. Antandrus 23:29, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Piano: String or Percussion?

Double bass mentions that the piano is a member of the percussion family. how? Jaberwocky6669 June 30, 2005 20:04 (UTC)

The piano is fortunate to be the bastard child of both. The manner of sound production for the piano, specifically modern pianos, is percussive in nature; the felt hammers hit the strings, generating sound. Contrast this to the clavichord, where the tangent actually come into direct contact with the strings, which makes it slightly closer to the family of stringed instruments. Someone correct me if I missed something. --bleh fu talk fu June 30, 2005 21:22 (UTC)

See new intro: "ideally suited to exhibit the virtuoso work of a soloist, yet equally serves from the more humble place of accompaniment"

Reference

I think that this article needs more reference Exir Kamalabadi | Contributions 12:59, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

Clavichord/piano dynamic range

Is it really true that the Cristofori proto-piano had a 'wider dynamic range' than the clavichord? Or was it just louder? I have heard (from professionals) that the clavichord is difficult to record because the range between its quietest and loudest sounds is actually quite large. Since the hammer is thrown at the string, it is difficult to play very softly on a piano, whereas the tangent on a clavichord is under continuous control of the player.

--Tdent 15:22, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Summarize various edits, 9/11/05

• I tried to deal with the "volume, not range" bit concerning clavichords; thanks, Tdent.
• I put A440 in a hopefully more relevant spot; i.e. on tuning.
• Alpheus Babcock worked for Chickering only later on, not at the time he invented the iron frame. Apparently he was a flop as a businessman, and was unable to make money from his 1825 invention, so he gave up and worked for Chickering instead. This is from the Parakilas book cited at the end of the article.
• Intro was getting long, to the point that on some screens the reader wouldn't be able to see the table of contents. So I moved the stuff on the role of the piano in music and society to a separate section; also reduced hammered dulcimer to a link later on.
• I removed what looks to me to be a batch of linkspam. We should be vigilant here, because this is just the sort of article that people with a commercial interest are likely to want to add non-scholarly links to.
• Added link to piano wire

Opus33 16:56, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

Overstringing

"Overstringing was invented by Jean-Henri Pape during the 1820s, and first applied to the grand by Henry Steinway Jr. in 1859." Henry Steinway acknowledges precedent for overstringing in squares and uprights but claims, "though some attempts may have been made in that direction I have after much research failed to find that an overstrung grand piano has, prior to the date of my present invention, ever been constructed," (US. 26,532. H. Steinway. Grand Piano. 20.12.1859) and this is echoed in advertisement by musical celebrities ("now residing in this country"; Scientific American. Sept 8, 1860. p. 174). Hipkins and other historians credit him the invention, but mention overstrung grand pianos displayed by Herman Lichtenthal at the 1851 Great Exhibition ("not so much for tone as for symmetry of the case"; Hipkins, A. J. The History of the Pianoforte. Scientific American Supplement, No. 385, May 19, 1883). American patents were more accessible than European patents and though Steinway emigrated 1851 (Wikipedia:Steinway & Sons) a patent for overstringing was issued to Lichtenthal in Belgium ten years earlier (1838: Belg. No. 1050. Order No. 144 - Harding, Rosamond. The Piano-Forte. Gresham Books. Old Woking, Surrey. 1978. p.362), and Steinways had worked for other New York makers first before starting in their own name (Henry, sr. - Laucht; Henry, jr., Charles, Albert - Bacon & Raven; William - Nunns & Clark. Crombie, David. Piano. GPI Books, San Francisco, 1995. p.102). Lichtenthal also held an 1832 patent for a 'tape check' action used in most current uprights that is usually credited to Robert Wornum (Bel. No. 538, Order No. 113 - Harding, p.319). He emigrated from Brussels to St. Petersburg by 1851 (Closson, Ernest. l'Histoire du Piano. Malik Sadoine), and it is probably his precedent for overstrung grands that Chickerings (who, as well as Nunns & Clark had exhibited at the Great Exhibition; Henry jr. is also said to have worked for Pirsson, another exhibitor; Lenehan, Michael. K 2571 -The Making of a Steinway Grand. 2003) asserted on behalf of the Russians (Parton, James. The Piano in the United States. The Atlantic monthly. July 1867 pp. 84). A small Lichtenthal 'dog-kennel' upright from 1840 is shown in Colt's book (Colt, C. F. The Early Piano. Stainer & Bell. London. 1981. p.120). Peter Lichtenthal [1] was his brother. (Vermeersch, Peter. Sounds to Cherish - Down Here and Up in Heaven. Andante, 2003) Mireut 15:34, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you. It will take me a while, but I will try to read all your reference sources and fix this problem (if no one else does so first). Opus33 23:41, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Before that, I think the main problem in the section is that only in a few old designs (like Mathushek orchestral, and then in the tenor) increase string length substantially since oblique stringing already was common - the inventors usually wrote the crossed stringing was to improve tone and tuning stability, as Mathushek elaborated, "the strings can all be made larger and there can be an increased number to each note as there is more room for them" (US.8,470. F. Mathushek. Stringing Pianos. 1851). Mireut 23:02, 16 November 2005 (UTC)