Pianotech

Regards,

So having agreed that Chickering continued the restless and transitory process of manufacturing that emulated Osbourne, i'd also like to say that he also clearly had a strong business sense and some clarity of plan. So he did establish scales (or at least the culture which provided that foundation) and he attempted to stay with a plan for cabinet shapes, string scale, plans, and the like.  He brought in the inventor of the cast iron plate, Alpheus Babcock, who didn't make pianos with cast iron plates in spite of having invented it, and proceeded to build pianos with cast-iron plates with Babcock on board and a new Chickering  plate patent to boot.  And Jonas himself died before this plethora of scales had been developed.  The fact that Chickering the company started so long ago, had so many decades to build pianos, and built a large number over 140 years, is kind of lost on us when we make our sweeping generalizations about Chickering never making the same piano twice.  There is no doubt that Chickering couldn't hold still, nor could his sons - especially his sons. But this was normal for them, it took Steinway to come along and build fewer styles and scales and stick with them with less change, and market strongly these few styles.  Steinway started later and was readily able to reject anachronism in design.  And Chickering's brilliant innovations in the 1860s and 70s often were not continued, were dropped, and then taken back up later, but only after Steinway had gotten an edge with them.  And because most Chickering grand pianos used the Brown action till 1900, they were saddled with an action which - exquisite to play – is in the service department, unforgiving.   So by 1910-1912 Chickering had transitioned entirely to the Erard Herz action.

Poor Jonas himself doesn't deserve our heaping frustration or sweeping judgment - he died in 1852 and very few have seen any pianos from his period of manufacturing - and even his sons might be worth more restraint and respect.  

Both companies nearly went under in the 1890s, but each thrived after.

FWIW the scale 116 is 6'4", the 119 is the longer one.  I've heard that scales varied in length but have always disproved this so far.

Always so interesting to talk about Hardesty.  I've seen some work of his that I was baffled by, but my exposure was anecdotal.  His work should be more thoroughly chronicled.  Maybe you and Alan should write something up - or at least be interviewed?