Upright vs. Grand Action
Brent Bigler
Yamaha U3, I took the sheet music to the local Steinway dealer, sat down at
a 'B,' and whiled away thirty minutes marvelling at how much EASIER it was
to get the speed and control I needed. Now I'm wondering why? I understand
that upright and grand actions are designed differently. I would think,
however, that the upright action, having less gravitational pull on its
hammers and less mass in its shorter keys, would actually be easier to
motivate and offer more control. Plus, why hasn't a clever designer
exploited these advantages to make the upright action better than the grand.
I'm sure I'm missing something, because the proof is in the playing. Still,
why the big difference?
--Brent
Ed Foote
>however, that the upright action, having less gravitational pull on its
>hammers and less mass in its shorter keys, would actually be easier to
>motivate and offer more control.
Greetings,
The upright's resistance is largely due to a hammer return spring, the
grand's is mainly due to gravity. The grand also compresses and uses a spring
to speed the lift of the key, thus increasing the speed of repetition.
however, this spring is not really felt as part of the process, (unless quite
strong and the "drop" adjustment is set quite low.)
There are other geometry issues involved here, I am sure someone else will
chime in.
Regards,
Ed Foote
Nashville, Tennessee
get freed from equal temperament
http://www.uk-piano.org/edfoote/index.html
Barrie Heaton
<a4...@aol.com> writes
>> I would think,
>>however, that the upright action, having less gravitational pull on its
>>hammers and less mass in its shorter keys, would actually be easier to
>>motivate and offer more control.
The most important difference is double escapement on a grand. This
allows you to press the key to the bottom and only allow the key to come
up 1 - 2mm and play again, on a good upright regulated well the would
be - 5-6 mm[1] There are some older grands out there with single
escapement and they have the same problems as an upright.
There has been over the years upright actions that have tried to address
this problem however, production cost has made it out of reach to most
manufactures. One of the best old ones was the Bechstein upright of the
20's with the Costa spring on the jack this improved speed and control
to a point. Langer did one in the 80's also Del Fandrich in the US has
an action that is said to be very good, I personally have not seen it
so I can not comment.
Barrie,
[1] There are some makes that will get better results.
--
Barrie Heaton İ The U.K. Piano Page:
http://www.a440.co.uk İ http://www.uk-piano.org/
PGP Key on request İ Home to the UK Piano Industry
GARY TETERS
Barrie Heaton <Bar...@forte.airtime.co.uk> wrote in message One of the best
old ones was the Bechstein upright of the
> 20's with the Costa spring on the jack this improved speed and control
> to a point. > Barrie,
>
Barrie,
Could you describe the Costa spring? I have seen additional springs on the
jacks from early Mason and Hamlin uprights, maybe it is the same.
Gary Teters
Alec Kercheval
why one would consider a grand instead of an upright for the
home when they cost so much more and take up so much more space,
aside from greater string length and the resultant lower inharmonicity.
Some folks mention double-escapement as the biggest difference,
and that does lead to faster repetition -- but I think it's
more a matter of basic geometry. The farther you are from
the fulcrum of a lever, the easier it is to control it --
this may be the biggest single factor.
Less mass and gravitational
pull does not lead to more control -- gravity is actually
our friend because it is a uniform force acting the same
way on all masses, whereas the force exerted by springs
varies from spring to spring and by amount of flexion.
This gives the advantage to the grand.
Also gravity adds a nonuniformity to a vertical action because
the hammer tips over from one side of vertical to the other
during its motion. So there are several variable forces
on an upright hammer, unlike the grand.
I very recently graduated from a Steinway vertical to
a used Yamaha C3. The trade was pretty close to even in price --
and the home user might wonder why I would give up the Steinway
sound. The answer is that its a big step up in terms of overall
control ability -- I was starting to feel like I was being held
back in certain technical ways by the upright action. Naturally,
the Steinway B would be the ideal solution... that'll have
to wait!
Alec
Brent Bigler wrote:
>
> What an epiphany! Yesterday, after months of practicing a piece on my
> Yamaha U3, I took the sheet music to the local Steinway dealer, sat down at
> a 'B,' and whiled away thirty minutes marvelling at how much EASIER it was
> to get the speed and control I needed. Now I'm wondering why? I understand
> that upright and grand actions are designed differently. I would think,
> however, that the upright action, having less gravitational pull on its
> hammers and less mass in its shorter keys, would actually be easier to
Francis Oen
I've played on the Sauter uprights and they seem much better at repetitions
than other pianos. I understand that Seiler also has a action that uses
magnets to increase repetition rate.
Has anybody any other experiences with the Sauters and Seilers?
Regards
Francis
GARY TETERS wrote in message
<8dgabo$4kcs$1...@newssvr03-int.news.prodigy.com>...
Yogi Panda
Some D's are better ... Yogi
Barrie Heaton
<garyl...@prodigy.net> writes
>
>
>Barrie Heaton <Bar...@forte.airtime.co.uk> wrote in message One of the best
>old ones was the Bechstein upright of the
>> 20's with the Costa spring on the jack this improved speed and control
>> to a point. > Barrie,
>>
>Barrie,
>Could you describe the Costa spring? I have seen additional springs on the
>jacks from early Mason and Hamlin uprights, maybe it is the same.
> Gary Teters
>
>
Hi Gary,
This is one on a Broadwood - like the Bechstein there are two springs a
spiral spring which is found on most uprights and the Costa spring
linked to the hammer by a cord loop which passes through the jack.
http://www.a440.co.uk/photos/broadwood/broadwood_up_action_spring.jpg
Barrie,
Barrie Heaton
<ale...@pacbell.net> writes
>
>Some folks mention double-escapement as the biggest difference,
>and that does lead to faster repetition -- but I think it's
>more a matter of basic geometry. The farther you are from
>the fulcrum of a lever, the easier it is to control it --
>this may be the biggest single factor.
Geometry is a big factor when compering like for like however, when
compering uprights to grands this is not so for repetition, the main
factor is double escapement. Take some of the upright pianoals they have
keys as long as grands, yet the repetition is poor compered with a
grand. Also, as I pointed out in my previous email there has been
single escapement grands with long key with v poor repetition.
Shellian
Forgive me if this is a stupid question, but what about so-called
"upright grand pianos?" A friend of mine has an old old piano that she
refers to as an "upright grand." I did not know there was such a thing,
so I just smiled and nodded when she showed it to me the first time. Now
this piano is so old, the action is incomparable to any other piano I've
ever touched. It's basically a big wooden coffin that can occasionally
be coerced into making noises. But if it were repaired and in good
condition, would the action be that of a grand piano, or an upright?
BTW this is a very interesting thread - I appreciate your communal
expertise.
Thanks -
Shelly
Alec Kercheval
The lever I was talking about wasn't the key lever, it was
the lever formed by the hammer and its pivot point. The
grand action contacts that lever farther away from the pivot
than the upright action does. This is because of the upright
action design and not particularly related to key length,
although that is another factor.
I agree that repetition speed is an important issue, but
I think dynamic control is even more important.
Alec
Alec Kercheval
to my local Steinway dealer (Sherman Clay in Oakland).
When I told the salesman I wanted to consign my Steinway 1098 vertical because
I had just bought a Yamaha C3, he asked
"Just out of curiosity, why would you trade a fine, hand-crafted
instrument for a mass-produced, machine-made one ?"
So here's my experiment. Let's put a Steinway 1098 vertical
side by side with a 5'10" Boston grand (to stick with Steinway brands)
in a face off.
Ignoring any price or space considerations, which one is likely
to be judged the better instrument overall: the fine,
hand-crafted Steinway or the mass-produced Boston?
(The prices are actually fairly close, with the Boston
maybe a thousand or two more.)
You could replace the 5'10" Boston with the 7'2" Boston if you
want to really show how dumb the salesman's question was, but
even if not I think the grand would be a clear winner. The reason
is the tantalizing subject of this thread.
Of course, price and space ARE considerations, which
is why the market for verticals is so big.
BTW, I wound up not consigning my piano there: their judgment was
that they could easily and quickly sell my piano for $12K but would
pass only $7K through to me. Overhead and all that. I decided to pass.
(Anyone like to buy a 4 yr old Steinway 1098 ? ;) )
Alec
Rick Clark
called a marketing term. It is just another term for the typical large
American upright pianos which were so common the first part of the
20th century, and most of which are still sitting in someone's home.
The main reason the term Upright Grand was used was to separate them
in the public perception from the earlier uprights of the early-mid
1800's which were of a very different design, weak, unstable, and
couldn't stay in tune or deliver much in the way of dynamics. When the
much more robust and heavily built uprights were introduced at the end
of the 19th century, it was felt that the buying public must
understand that these were not the uprights of yesteryear, and thus
they chose the term "Upright Grand" as part of that message. Today, we
commonly just call them uprights, because they are so common that it
isn't so neccessary to spearate the concepts anymore. Actually, the
older style of upright is now qualified with the monikers "Birdcage"
or "Overdamper".
Rick Clark
Rick Clark
*friend* means when *she* says "Upright Grand". Since I have no way to
view this piano. I have no way to know if this is the typical old
American upright, or if she is actually using the term some other way.
But the basic design principles in old American upright actions are
essentially the same as in upright actions today, though in small
upright pianos (or spinets) the forms are so shrunken or even
shoehorned in (to fit in the compacted cabinets) , that the average
person may not be able to recognize how similar old upright actions
actually are to newer, much shorter pianos. But a large American
upright piano from, say, 1900 is almost identical in all the essential
elements to the same-size upright piano from the year 2000.
RC
Gary
baby grands. That fact is still true today and if you ain't got the room for
a grand then go for a tall upright !!!! Some * precious * dealers will have
you believe that an uptright piano will leave you unsatisfied..... crap crap
crappo.
There are two main differences between grands and U/r's
1. Is grands have double escapement / Repetition lever
2. Hammers strike the strings from opposite sides.
There are many arguments for and against for both the above.
I am a big fan of good u/r pianos.The repetition thing that most people
trot out is a non - issue to me as 8-10 repeats per second is easily
achievable and is beyond the reach of your average pianist anyway.
Cheers
Gaary.
Shellian wrote in message <38FD26BD...@rci.net>...
glennh...@my-deja.com
years, have to agree with 'Gary' Good upright is hard to
beat...However, if I came across a good size Steinway grand.(that I
could afford) ..well....Glenn...
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
eromlignod
upright pianos. I find this hard to believe. He did order a
Pleyel upright to be sent to his island retreat in Mallorca,
Spain when he spent the winter there with George Sand. Whether
this is becuase he prefered the upright or because it was easier
to ship or he had space limitations, I don't know.
Don
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Clark
Chopin did prefer Pleyel uprights, and, I believe, Erard grands; I read
about an upright with a factory-applied Chopin endorsement, though it
may have been posthumous. I've also been told that 1830's and 40's
Pleyel, Lyon et cie uprights play marvelously, and the 'English' action
model (based on one of these Pleyels) I have seems to support this,
despite - or maybe because of its older form of let-off.
Robert Wornum, famed for popularizing this English/French action, seems
to have preferred it so much as to implement it in up- and down striking
grands along with his uprights. There is a certain economy of parts to
this, and it looks actually to work for the down-striking form but his
1843-patented Tape Check Grand Action does not at all appear to be well
planned.
Regards,
Clark
pianos...@my-deja.com
Darrell Fandrich, not his brother Del. Del designed and manufactured
the custom Fandrich piano in the early 1990s, which I've heard praised
as a revolutionary and stunningly beautiful instrument (although I've
never had an opportunity to play/hear/see one). Darrell's vertical
action, as manufactured by Renner, was used in the Fandrich piano until
the Del's company closed down.
Now, Darrell has a small shop in northeast Seattle (Fandrich & Sons)
and installs his vertical action in upright pianos that he imports -
and, in the case of the Chinese pianos, substantially modifies - from
Germany and China. There is a noticable difference from a standard
upright in terms of control and repetition. For a better explanation
of the invention and an excellent discussion of the history of piano
action development, see his website at
http://www.fandrich.com/html/actions.htm
I've read that Del's piano design has been licensed and there is a
Fandrich Piano Co. store in Chicago but I've never been and don't know
whether those pianos use Darrell's action.
In article <bvmKrOEV...@forte.airtime.co.uk>,
Barrie Heaton <Bar...@forte.airtime.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <20000417132811...@ng-fw1.aol.com>, Ed Foote
> <a4...@aol.com> writes
> >> I would think,
> >>however, that the upright action, having less gravitational pull on
its
> >>hammers and less mass in its shorter keys, would actually be easier
to
> >>motivate and offer more control.
>
> The most important difference is double escapement on a grand. This
> allows you to press the key to the bottom and only allow the key to
come
> up 1 - 2mm and play again, on a good upright regulated well the
would
> be - 5-6 mm[1] There are some older grands out there with single
> escapement and they have the same problems as an upright.
>
> There has been over the years upright actions that have tried to
address
> this problem however, production cost has made it out of reach to
most
> manufactures. One of the best old ones was the Bechstein upright of
the
> 20's with the Costa spring on the jack this improved speed and
control
> to a point. Langer did one in the 80's also Del Fandrich in the US
has
> an action that is said to be very good, I personally have not seen
it
> so I can not comment.
>
> Barrie,
>
> [1] There are some makes that will get better results.
> --
> Barrie Heaton İ The U.K. Piano Page:
> http://www.a440.co.uk İ http://www.uk-piano.org/
> PGP Key on request İ Home to the UK Piano Industry
>
>