Help with Bluthner action
Calin
I have seen a wonderful Bluthner piano for sale, form 1908 which has an
unusual (to me, at least) action. It doesn't seem to have the double
repetition.
Could anyone give me more info about this action? Is it any good?
I have posted pictures of it on my website:
http://calintantareanu.tripod.com/piano/bluthner.htm
By the way, I have also posted further pictures of the Bechstien piano
restoration:
http://calintantareanu.tripod.com/piano/
Thanks!
--
__________________________
Calin
http://calintantareanu.tripod.com
__________________________
pianoguy
"Calin" wrote:
> I have seen a wonderful Bluthner piano for sale, form 1908 which has an
> unusual (to me, at least) action. It doesn't seem to have the double
> repetition.
> Could anyone give me more info about this action? Is it any good?
========================================================
It's interesting that the actions you show are always very clean and appear to have
had little use. It seems like the pianos I find always look like they have been run
over by a train. The action in question is typical Bluthner for the era in which it
was built, certainly better than a square grand action but not up to the function of
a modern action with repetition levers. No doubt a well made instrument, single
strung with full agraffes...some Bluthners had aliquots but I don't see them on your
specimen. This piano could be reconditioned to play nicely and would be an excellent
example of a historic instrument, however it will not have the firm easily controlled
touch nor the repetition of a modern action.
Your veneering is very nice, wow! what a big job. You did not mention sanding sealer,
are you using lacquer directly on the wood?
--
pianoguy
return email disabled
Nick Bell
This is the Bluthner patent action, their own design which they used until
the 1920s. It's just as good as the 'standard' type of action, but the feel
is a bit different, lighter with no let-off thump at the bottom of key
depression. Also the volume is slightly quieter than 'normal', but the
dynamic range is similar -- I guess that's one reason why they were known as
the perfect home piano. Might be confusing if you practised on one and then
had to play lots of Steinways. But who wants the Steinway sound when you can
have the Bluthner sound?
Nick (proud owner of 1893 Bluthner)
Calin <a...@me.com> wrote
FloridaTech
I thought that sanding sealer *was* lacquer! Isn't is just lacquer with
more solids?
Curious,
Dennis
"pianoguy" <oo...@doobie.xyz> wrote in message
news:bq0P5.75$xb1....@eagle.america.net...
pianoguy
> I thought that sanding sealer *was* lacquer! Isn't is just lacquer with
> more solids?
Sanding sealer is a base coat for lacquer, it helps to fill minor imperfections and
level wood surface. Though some times it's used as a final finish it's very soft and
not substantial for a top coat on furniture. You spray on several coats and sand with
320 or 400 wet or dry between each coat (it contains a substrate that sands very
easily..unlike lacquer which is quite hard)...when you have a nice smooth base then
you apply the lacquer...normally 2 or 3 coats.
Calin
"pianoguy" <oo...@doobie.xyz> wrote in message
news:bq0P5.75$xb1....@eagle.america.net...
> It's interesting that the actions you show are always very clean and
appear to have
> had little use. It seems like the pianos I find always look like they have
been run
> over by a train. The action in question is typical Bluthner for the era in
which it
Well, I've seen many trashed pianos too. But I didn't bother to post
pictures of those... :-)
> was built, certainly better than a square grand action but not up to the
function of
> a modern action with repetition levers. No doubt a well made instrument,
single
> strung with full agraffes...some Bluthners had aliquots but I don't see
them on your
> specimen. This piano could be reconditioned to play nicely and would be an
excellent
> example of a historic instrument, however it will not have the firm easily
controlled
> touch nor the repetition of a modern action.
I see. When I first saw the piano, I was impressed, It looks very nice, has
gilded iron plate (on some parts) and the overall condition is very good. It
lid hasn't been probably opened in years. Quite clean inside.
Playing it was the first problem. the action seemed to perform different
from the usual one (compared to my bechstein for instance). It feels
actually similar to the viennese action. Seems to have less repetition and
power than the Bechstein, which is in fact older!!!
> Your veneering is very nice, wow! what a big job. You did not mention
sanding sealer,
> are you using lacquer directly on the wood?
Thanks!
We aren't using sanding sealer. We applied 2 thick coats of lacquer at first
and sanded them. That's the sealer. Then we applied other coats of normal
lacquer, sanding in between, and also aplying thinner at times.
We're not ready yet.
--
Calin Tantareanu
----------------------------------------------------
e-mail: d...@fx.ro
http://calintantareanu.tripod.com
----------------------------------------------------
Calin
Thanks for your reply. It is indeed a very nice piano.
But, compared to Bechstein (my own piano), it doesn't sound and play that
good. At least to me. Probably because of the action.
You can see the Bechstein on my website.
LstPuritan
ever played. My teacher said that Bluthners take getting used to but are
capable of great expression once one adapts to them. I have no idea if this is
true, but he claimed Bluthners are purposely designed only to allow soft
dynamics by using "swift attack and subsequent restraint of keybead impact?" I
was unable to produce any volume softer than mezzo forte; any attempt at
pianissimo resulted in a 80% chance of no sound. I watched the hammer retract
and never touch string using the same touch I always had on the Steinways and
Yamahas I played in college. Many of the older Steinways had a unique feel
which took some adaption of technique, but none of those Steinways ever refused
to be played once I figured out what type of control was needed to get the
sound I wanted. I had to play that Bluthner off and on for 5 years, and I
started to get the hang of attacking the key harder than I would expect and
then letting up force just before contact to get a quiet sound, but in any
piece with repeated notes I almost always had to slow the tempo of the entire
piece.
I had to perform Chopin's F major Ballade on the wreck after having practiced
on other pianos for the previous weeks and when I began the piece (slow
piannisimo repeated middle c and the c above it) I played the first two
beats... and no sound was produced. Luckily, people assumed I was--cleaning
the keys or performing some odd ritual for good luck; when I began again, I
feared that one of the Cs would sound with one hand but the other would not,
which WOULD be noticable. So the entire piece never dropped below mF. In the
coda, I think only about .618% of the right hand presto repeated pinky notes
actually sounded, even though I was consciously letting the key come all the
way up before playing it again. Luckily Chopin placed many other loud notes
and enough pedal that it was probably not audible that notes had dropped out.
Eventually, I just decided to play everything on that Bluthner letting mF equal
pp and FFFFF equal FF.
Then I played the Opus One Berg Sonata, which actually HAS quadruple fortissimo
in a passage culminating with one enormous chord graced by double octaves...
Because the volume of the whole piece was necessarily altered by me, I wrote in
several more Fortissimi and my teacher asked that I please don't break his
piano (again; Rach c# broke it the first time). I broke it a second time with
Berg; so what if a few hammers struck one string of the adjacent tone when the
una corda was employed?? Ha! I said that no one would need that pedal because
a 'quiet' pedal can't make SILENT playing any 'quieter,' but he did not think
it was very funny. I suggested he actually have the piano regulated normally;
The piano's action has been lightened (for Couperin the complete works of whom
my teacher was recording) and the dampers have been slightly raised permanently
for flutter and half pedaling.
I know nothing about pianos so this is not meant as a "Vs." statement, but I
don't understand the fascination surrounding old pianos, Steinway and Bluthner
and Bechstein et alia est rara avises neque tagenda. It's not an issue of
'period instrument' and if hundred year old Bluthners are old enough to be
'valued antiques,' then it does not make sense to use them as anything except
furniture. Most older pianos of esteemed name are not maintained even at
Universities, and from what I understand they require quite a lot of attention
and work to stay in good playing shape but in the end: do the older pianos
truly sound better? If so, why?
I won't state the fact that I really like brand new Yamahas because Larry and
Yogi might start playing bloody knuckles again about Z-Prongs and other things
I've never heard of. The question of mine is simply about why Steinways are
rebuilt and coveted aside from the ownership value of a good historical name
with bragging rights. But there are new Steinways... and the older ones were
once new... and normally mechanical things do not improve with age like wine:
they run down.
There must be something special about hundred year old Steinways and Bluthners,
then. Constructed from the wood of a tree that is now extinct, or now illegal
strings of cat intestines? Or perhaps mass production has left no piano craft
and some knowledge has been lost about how to make a good piano?
Back to my GranTouch... which hasn't needed tuning in years, although those
wretched assembly workers forgot to install strings. Would that cats were
allowed in my building...
--Justin
**************************
www.mp3.com/justin_d_scott
**************************
Liszt, Scriabin, Schoenberg, Bach
Fractal Composition, Original Works
Debussy Orchestrations, and More
Darryl Greene
>have the Bluthner sound?
Got a Steinway and it ain't bad - wouldn't trade it for the sound of a
Bluthner. So here's one who wants the Steinway sound.
- Darryl
Calin
Your experience with the old Bluethner action seems similar to what I have
noticed. I would compare that action to the viennese; they feel quite
similar: shallow touch, less dynamic range, although the viennese is able to
play very soft, but not as loud as the english action.
> I know nothing about pianos so this is not meant as a "Vs." statement, but
I
> don't understand the fascination surrounding old pianos, Steinway and
Bluthner
> and Bechstein et alia est rara avises neque tagenda. It's not an issue of
> 'period instrument' and if hundred year old Bluthners are old enough to be
> 'valued antiques,' then it does not make sense to use them as anything
except
> furniture. Most older pianos of esteemed name are not maintained even at
> Universities, and from what I understand they require quite a lot of
attention
> and work to stay in good playing shape but in the end: do the older pianos
> truly sound better? If so, why?
I hope I didn't leave the impression that I generally consider old pianos as
being superior to new ones. I don't agree with that.
But there are some old pianos which are still performing great, equalling
many new pianos, sometimes even surpassing them. But that depends on the
state of the particular instrument. If it is in good shape etc.
Anyway, most old pianos I have heard weren't sounding as good as new ones,
with a few exceptions. And those exceptions are worth preserving.
> I won't state the fact that I really like brand new Yamahas because Larry
and
> Yogi might start playing bloody knuckles again about Z-Prongs and other
things
If you like them it's ok. I don't, not because they use vacuum cast plates,
but because their sound seems to me too metallic and strident. But I am also
not particularly fond of Steinways either. Compared to a european piano
(Bechstein, Boesendorfer) they still have a "metallic character". I know
most of the newsgroups readers would be outraged by this statement, but it's
a matter of taste.
> I've never heard of. The question of mine is simply about why Steinways
are
> rebuilt and coveted aside from the ownership value of a good historical
name
> with bragging rights. But there are new Steinways... and the older ones
were
> once new... and normally mechanical things do not improve with age like
wine:
> they run down.
The answer is quite simple: besides the good name, an old piano might be a
very high quality instrument worth restoring and able to perform very well.
Considering the price difference between old and new, it saves you a lot of
money.
Not to mention that I, for instance, have checked out new Yamaha pianos at
the dealer and couldn't find one to sound as good as the113 year old
Bechstein I bought. But again, it's a matter of taste.
Taht's the reason why I am rebuilding my piano. I think it is still a very
good instrument.
> There must be something special about hundred year old Steinways and
Bluthners,
> then. Constructed from the wood of a tree that is now extinct, or now
illegal
> strings of cat intestines? Or perhaps mass production has left no piano
craft
> and some knowledge has been lost about how to make a good piano?
I think that making a very good piano takes more than knowledge. Among other
things it takes some luck too. The wood is never the same - that's why even
2 new identical pianos don't sound alike.
Chances are you find an exceptional piano new at the shop or used who knows
where.
> Back to my GranTouch... which hasn't needed tuning in years, although
those
> wretched assembly workers forgot to install strings. Would that cats were
> allowed in my building...
Digitals seem to have advantages too, although the general opinion on this
NG is that they aren't as good as acoustics :-)
--
__________________________
Calin
d...@fx.ro
http://calintantareanu.tripod.com
__________________________
Kuberaj
You wrote,
>But I am also
>not particularly fond of Steinways either. Compared to a european piano
>(Bechstein, Boesendorfer) they still have a "metallic character"
Sometimes I don't know what to think about Steinway, the new ones especially.
Partly it's from playing them in the NYC showrooms, where they're new, and
maybe they need breaking in or more TLC in reg/voicing. I don't sense the
"metallic character" (maybe that's just the Steinway tone compared to the
European). But there is what I would call an unlovely, industrial sound to
them, not a pretty or singing sound, more the impression of working with a
piece of machinery. Sometimes I think I'm just being cynical, and some
Steinways are truly great (usually older ones in my experience, I'm obliged to
say). But regardless of tone quality, a well-regulated S&S action will allow
you to get your work done!
Of course, at least according to the edition of "The Piano Book" that I have,
Steinways do often need exquisite work by expert technicians to sound and feel
their best.
As comparison, sometimes you'll come across a beautiful Mason & Hamlin, as I
have, with a perfectly even, balanced tone across the keyboard, with the notes
from the middle to top sounding much like beautiful bells. Wow.
I don't play enough European pianos to know them well, so can't comment, and
the Bluthners I've played did not impress. Quite possibly because of the state
of repair.
Donning my flame-retardant suit as I close...off to Europe for a concert, so
can't respond for a few days.
Joe Kubera
Billie Ray Martin
Billie Ray Martin
I've recorded with a historic Bluethner with vienna single rep. action and it is the most complete, warm, and
wonderful sound i've ever heard. I will not work with another piano again and i always look around to find out which
studio might have one.