Re: Slur on Baby Grands
By A. B. Bonds
> From: rhodes (Robbie Rhodes)
> Subject: Re: Aeolean baby grand, digest 960129
>
> Most really small (short) old baby grands, in my opinion, are no
> more than a useless piece of furniture: the tone is so poor.
> I much prefer the sound of a big, 56-inch vertical "upright" piano,
> which has much more sound board area than has the tiny grand.
>
> The "baby grand" piano exists to fill the piano salesman's
> requirement for an _inexpensive_ grand piano. It's extremely
> difficult to make a tiny piano with the same tone that a bigger
> piano has. But the typical piano customer is more concerned with
> the price. The baby grand has almost the same number of parts as
> a big concert grand, therefore if it is to be cheaper it can only
> be because it is assembled hastily, and the design probably hasn't
> changed in 80 years! (And it was a poor design _then_!)
Ouch ouch ouch ouch. That hurt. I've seen bad baby grands and bad uprights, even bad big grands. I believe that it is unseemly to generalize to the extent seen here (although I note that it is clearly marked Opinion). IMHO (note the O) the sound is related fairly strongly to the build quality of the instrument, which is more dependent on the maker than the size of the instrument. In many cases, high-quality small grands were desired simply because people didn't have room for larger instruments. In any even, I will defend my Wm Knabe B (all 5'6" of it). My technician commented constantly on the high quality of the components at all levels, and there is no way that one could consider the case wood a compromise of any sort. It does not have as solid a bottom as a 6'+, but then neither could I fit a 6' in my living room (and be there to listen to it). I have also seen small Mason & Hamlins and Chickerings that are absolute gems of both sight and sound.
> Your big old Gulbransen vertical will yield much more exciting
> music than an old baby grand.
Actually, this raises another issue I have not seen discussed before. I have the Knabe in the living room and the Marshall & Wendell (= Chevrolet Chickering) upright A in the dining room (two ends of the same big room, actually). I find myself clearly preferring the Knabe for classical music and clearly preferring the upright for pops (Adam Carroll and the like--let's hear it for The Carioca!!!) I believe that the brighter sound of the upright has something to do with it--it's really loud (as opposed to refined). And despite the upright action, its rep rate seems faster than that of the B (another thread...) Anyway, I was wondering if any other gentle readers had the same sort of preference.
(PS I agree ya shoulda gotten the DuoArt....)
A. B. Bonds
|
(Message sent Thu 1 Feb 1996, 00:29:18 GMT, from time zone GMT-0600.) |
|
|
Mechanical
Music Digest™ Archives
