Due to margin mechanics problems, part of Patricia Frederick’s text was missing in today’s blog on the Fritz piano, so here are the entire paragraphs which have relevance to the discussion.
“What I particularly like about Viennese actions such as the Fritz, is that the single escapement gives such a direct sense of being in touch with the strings, due to their having fewer moving parts between the key and hammer. The damper mechanism you describe is the standard Viennese model. As you have undoubtedly discovered, you just have to use a lighter foot on the pedal so the damper rack doesn’t drop the dampers back on the strings with a crash.” (She was referring to the visible black pedal bar that bobs up and down with each depression of the sustain pedal)
Second missing paragraph:
“For heaven’s sake, don’t let anyone hire any piano technician who thinks the Fritz piano should be “rebuilt,” if by that he means replacing the soundboard and hammers. That would totally ruin the piano! Many technicians have been taught that every piano over about 50 years old should be rebuilt, just as a matter of routine. This is simply not true, and results in the destruction of countless old pianos, because the grades of hammer felt and soundboard wood available today are vastly inferior to what was available to original builders. Tom Winter would probably be someone who can be trusted to work on the Fritz piano.”
Next paragraph in completion:
“If you like the bass on the Fritz piano you played, you would love the bass on our Streicher. It is extremely resonant and clear, perfectly articulating the contrapuntal bass lines in Schumann’s music, which I feel loses more in the transition to the modern piano than the music of any other composer, except maybe Brahms.”
Thanks for your patience and understanding.