The pianos of Liszt and his contemporaries?

[sevencircles]

What pianos did Liszt, Dreyschock etc. play on?

What was the action like and how did they sound?

Sometimes you hear about violinconcertos played on Paganini´s violin but I have never heard about someone playing on Listzt´s pianos.

Perhaps none of them are playable today, or?

[countchocula]

There was Erard, was Liszt liked - also Pleyel, which Chopin played...
In America there was Chickering...
I think Bosendorfer was also around at that time...
I think that those companies were the biggest piano manufactureres at the time.

[zheer]

they were nothing compared to the pianos we have today.

[thalbergmad]

they were nothing compared to the pianos we have today.

Once the iron frame was introduced, i don't think you would find a great deal of difference between an 1850's piano and that of today.

It is true that in Liszts early career, he was snapping strings all over the place to the extent that there was always a spare piano on hand. If he was capable of that, God only knows what Dreyschock did.

Many instruments have survived to this day fom this period and are in a playable condition. Anyone from England might be interested in visiting Finchocks piano museum in kent, which has an excellent collection of piano's and harpsichords in playable condition. I have spent a few happy Sunday afternoons there listening to them being played.

[sevencircles]

I believe Beethoven encouraged the pianomakers to make pianos that can take the power of extreme dynamics after destroying pianos himself.

Are any of Liszt´s favorite pianos playable today.

I am saying favorite since he propably played on countless pianos during his tours.

[musicsdarkangel]

I have heard that the action was easier in the days of Liszt, but who knows.

[thalbergmad]

I have heard that the action was easier in the days of Liszt, but who knows.

I think there was a lot of variation.

I have played on a 1840's Pleyel (I think) on which Arnold Scharzenegger would have been tested to depress the keys.

[mikey6]

hmm, that's odd becuase you always hear how easy Erlkonig is to play on Schubert's piano.  Was there that much of an advancement in 25 years?
There is one of Liszt's piano's at the La Scala museum all though i'm not sure if they play it.  I know at Mozart's house they still have someone play his piano occassionally so i'm guessing Liszt's piano's would still be in working in order.

[countchocula]

. . . you always hear how easy Erlkonig is to play on Schubert's piano. 

Mikey - where did you hear that?  That is very interesting - can you tell more?  Do you remember where you might have read that, or who said it?
Those octaves always struck me as unreasonably demanding, especially for Schubert, but what you said would make alot of sense...

[iumonito]

I suspect you will get a better-informed answer if this thread gets moved to instruments.

Liszt owned several pianos.  His favorites are said to have been his Steingraeber (a 200 cm instrument, 85 keys, relatively light action and great signing and ringing tone) and a Chickering (I have no details about size, but I would assume it was around 8'8"; I think one of these pianos is in the Liszt Ferenc museum in Budapest).  Mephisto Waltz is said to have been composed on a Bechstein.  There are paintings of Liszt playing Bosendorfer as well.

I am not sure, but I think the action of both the Steingraeber and the Chickering had "modern" double scapement, so they would have been quite responsive and able to play fast and loud without choking (which is generally not possible in a single scapement action like a Bluthner would have had and even worse in a ultra-light but feelble Vienese action like the Bosendorfer would have had).  I am not sure about Bechstein, I don't know whether the Schwander action at the time had double escapement, but it would not surprise me. 

The hammers would have been small compared to modern Abel blue hammers, which also makes the action feel lighter.  The hammers would have been all cold-pressed and without lacquering, so imagine a warmer albeit somewhat mellower (and smaller) sound.  (I mean, you can rip the roof off with an old Chickering, but with BIG sound, not the strident and clattery sound that you so sorely get from, say, a new NY Steinway D or a Baldwin SD-10).

Unless a historical instrument is properly restored and adjusted, playing a 150 year old piano will give you no indication of how this was supposed to sound or feel.  Pianos are not like violins, you know?  Soundboard crowns flatten, hammers harden, strings rust and actions break or simply become loose.

... and on the Earl King, chances are Schubert meant a tremmolo.  Liszt's transcription, though, is to be taken literally (and in consequence played slower than the original song).

[mikey6]

well actually now i'm rather confused thinking about it.  I knew that the action changed between pianos from the and now obviously but I rememebr hearing that the erlking would have been easier on Schuberts piano coz the touch is lighter - easier is all.  Also taking into consideration that it is performed on modern grands so it can't be impossible.
But in regeards to tremmolo, i'm not sure.  I think the cover edition of the songs has all 4 version of the song Schubert wrote (published?) and in one of them the RH has been reduced to duplets - i'm not sure whether that be for technical reasons or not although musically it takes a lot away from the drama!
I recently heard a performance by a horrendous pianist who ended up playing tremollo coz she couldn't play it in the first place!

[sevencircles]

I have always heard that the hammerklaviers of the early 19.th century were harder to play then modern pianos in general.

I have also heard that Liszt´t theatrical playing style was something he developed to be able to play fast and loud on the very stiff action pianos he often played on.

In other words he had to strike the keys with his entire arm if he wanted it to sound loud enough for the dynamic contrasts that some works demand.

[iumonito]

No, this is somewhat misinformed.  The action is not heavier, in that the touch weight of the instrument is less than in a modern instrument.  The single escapement pianos more typical of the pre-Erard era (e.g., Beethoven's Broadwood, Clementi's pianos) did not allow for as fast repetition, but getting lots of notes in fast is not a problem as all.

Now, loud is a very relative concept.  If you play with your full body on a modern Bosendorfer you still are not going to get the thunderous sound that you can get in a concert grand Chickering in a work like the Tannhauser overture.  If you play with such technique on a Broadwood you will surely break something.

I would say it is more accurate to say that Liszt discovered and developed his modern technique more as a result of the pianos becoming able to withstand it, rather than to compensate for any technological shortcoming.

[dave santino]

Apparently Liszt also used Steinway's later on in his life. There's a letter from him to the Steinway company on display at Steinway Hall in London, saying how wonderful the new pianos wereand how reliable they were. I can't remember the date of the letter, maybe someone else knows?

[apion]

Here's a photo of Liszt's actual piano:

[musik_man]

and here's his Moog and Keytar

[iumonito]

Raise the level a little, will ya'?

https://www.lisztmuseum.hu/eng/photos/chickering2.jpg

https://www.lisztmuseum.hu/eng/photos/holder.jpg

https://www.lisztmuseum.hu/eng/photos/chickering.jpg