Abel on Steinway B 211

And it is known that they are smaller, but why this comparison? Who is the lucky one?

A fortunate... they had told her (the usual luminaries) that to get the diploma she would have to change everything "in anticipation"...

The piano, as usual, then no longer played; the mechanics were inert and she no longer knew what to do.

Fortunately, she kept the originals in the storage room at home: they were practically in new condition.

Re-prepared, mounted... everything just as it came out of the factory.

O tempora, o mores...

You mean a job done only for the technician's pockets? And what defect was there to justify replacing a hammer with a worse one? I don't understand...

I don't know what to say anymore... I don't understand the reason nor the meaning of the work, the hammers, the drilling...

Nothing about the performance offered makes sense (heavily paid for, obviously...)

It happened by chance, through a friendship... She had already given up on complaining. She called other technicians, but to no avail...

"But what do you expect, young lady? My colleague did an excellent job."

Here we go again? Davehammerklavier and Giovanni Giglio... It seems to me that the saying is quite true: a leopard can't change its spots. Shall we go for a little stroll?

Are we really at this level? Has the individual's conscience been lost? I can understand that sometimes, on certain interventions to lower costs, a client accepts compromises, but proposing and especially executing an intervention like this, even to a novice like me, seems inappropriate.

From the photos, I can clearly see that the drill holes are out of alignment.

From my point of view, it is right to talk about it to increase the knowledge of piano users regarding the value of interventions and to encourage true and skilled technicians to do their best and to obtain fair compensation for their professionalism and acquired knowledge.

A Simon, I ask for clarification as I did not grasp the content of your intervention.

Dear Vantir, the content of my intervention is as follows... Under the pretext of attacking us, because according to some users we are Pro Abel and against Renner and everyone else here (as if companies were coming to give us money, yeah right...), they are actually doing exactly the opposite under the radar, namely promoting other brands and suppliers. So, once and for all, I feel compelled to remind you of the following because I am truly fed up with these gratuitous attacks and I think that a series of lawsuits will start shortly; let's at least close this matter once and for all and those who must pay will pay.

1) My intervention in this post refers to other previous interventions where some users have repeatedly defamed the name of a piano part manufacturer. This is a PRIVATE community whose messages are public and therefore readable by anyone; I am the one responsible for lawsuits in case of public defamation against companies.

Anyone can come here and express their own idea, otherwise what's the point!!! But there is a huge difference between expressing your own idea and conducting a defamation campaign against a company!!

Saying, for example: "Personally, I prefer the action of the Yamaha U3 over the action of Joe Blow X5" does not get me into any trouble. Saying "The action of the Joe Blow X5 sucks" is defamation against that company; and should I be the one to face the consequences? No thanks! Now I am nipping this in the bud.

The reason for my remarks is only this... I do not prefer any company over another, I am not a piano technician, I am not interested in any of these things. I am only interested in not getting into trouble because of other people who come here to use a service that I have spent time and money on to offer them for free, and instead of waging war against me and causing me trouble, they should just say thank you (stupid me for not kicking them out immediately, always in the name of transparency).

2) Since there are those who insinuate that we are linked to companies, I want to specify that we have no connection with companies; we are not paid by ANY COMPANY nor PIANO PART DEALER. Therefore, where people go to buy spare parts is of absolutely no interest to us! That's their problem. We have never done any propaganda for one distributor rather than another. Therefore, if "Gennaro" wants to install Renner or Abel, that's his business. I don't give a damn. As far as I'm concerned, they both make hammers. My knowledge on the subject ends there.

3) Anyone with a shred of brain can immediately sense that this post is defamatory from the start because its sole purpose is to defame, and I blocked it before things got out of control. Here, we are not talking about the technician, the work performed, and the specific requirements requested by him; instead, there is an immediate reference to a spare parts company, complete with photos and name indication, taking for granted and implying that they produce low-quality materials, without knowing—the central issue—what the actual specifications requested by the technician were.

4) We have NEVER sent private messages defaming third parties and advising to source spare parts from one side rather than the other, and this demonstrates our total transparency; all advice given (me regarding digital audio and pianoexpert, regarding piano technology) is public and belongs to the relevant discussions. You can personally verify with a simple search, if you wish, that I have never gone out of my way to say that a digital piano or a sample library sucks; I have always expressed my personal opinions, dictated by my taste and speaking of preferences; I have never expressed myself as if what I say about a product is objectively valid. Regarding the private sphere, we have limited ourselves to responding to requests received from registered users, which most of the time were met with the response "this topic could be interesting for everyone, let's discuss it publicly in a forum section"; we can even post our private conversations if there are any doubts, we absolutely have NOTHING to hide. Anyone is free to source from wherever they believe is best for them, unlike many other people who threw the stone and hid their hand. We do not hide behind such subterfuge.

I hope this is truly the last time I have to come back to discuss this matter because it is truly tiring me out. I do not have to justify myself to anyone, yet it seems that lately, because of someone, all I have to do is deal with private payment receipts being made public and private messages being made public.

However, you understand well that if after the storm a few weeks ago we return to asking for clarifications on the subject

reopening the discussion again I cannot help but think that there is someone in the shadows who continues to weave the web. Since I think you are an intelligent person I only ask you to reflect and understand whether to trust someone who speaks ill of others and advises from the shadows, publicly accusing others of "advising and preferring" (pure hypocrisy by definition), or someone who, if they have something to say, says it publicly with maximum transparency, respecting others and without having to worry so much.

In any case I think there is a limit to everything and believe me when I say that it is good not to cross this limit.

Given that I will never again enter into the subject under discussion for the rest of my life, I would like to point out that the Italian Constitution enshrines the Right to Criticism, against which companies, brands, multinationals, and public figures can absolutely do nothing.

They want to sue someone because they said one of their products wasn't good? Fine, let them. Their lawsuit will not gain much traction.

Defamation and insult are two crimes of a completely different nature that involve different methods than criticism.

Constitutionally speaking, the individual has the freedom to say: "The battleship Potemkin... is a total load of crap!" without committing any crime, provided that this statement is not presented as an absolute and indisputable truth, but who ever presents themselves in such a way?

If this freedom were not guaranteed, we would once again be under a regime dictatorship.

I also believe that constantly exposing references to crimes, lawsuits, and legal problems very easily unnecessarily exacerbates situations:

If we had to be careful about all existing offenses, then even saying "now I've had it up to here [vulgarity]" is an offense: it is considered profanity.

An administrative offense subject to complaint and punishable as such.

If we were all moved by feelings of greater harmony and brotherhood, we would never need lawyers.

Abel is a young company compared to Renner, which today is the most prestigious, in the sense that it is used in the most expensive pianos and by all the major manufacturers, whereas Abel is used on other productions where the action is not Renner (to give an example, Schulze Pollmann on the European Masterpiece production uses Renner actions and hammers, while on the studio line produced in the Orient, they use "standard" actions and Abel hammers).

Now, making a comparison between the two by stating how things actually are regarding hammers, hand to hand, does not seem like a bad service to me; if someone demonstrates that a hammer rail already pre-drilled for certain brands (Steinway, Bösendorfer or others....) has drilling defects, it doesn't seem like a bad service for the forum, it shows what is currently on the market. Obviously, one is then responsible for what they write and must be able to prove they have told the truth, having all the elements (if it is true, it is not defamation).

Besides, in the 1920s Renner was almost unknown and the most prestigious action was Schwander... So what? Why take it so personally? Personally, I don't feel like I have ever defamed any factory; in this case, I only said: "what was the need to change the hammer rail? Is it a job done for the technician's pockets?" That is my opinion, but I always think this when I see a technician proposing to replace a new hammer rail with another one (whether it be Abel or Renner), and not just on the forum, and I say it to their face if the occasion arises because it is my thought; then one must see why it is done that way, but it is right for pianists to grasp something more concrete, it seems to me that this is also your mission.

Guys, there is nothing wrong. If someone believes the Abel hammer is terrible because they have had bad results, they say so and make their comparisons, they demonstrate.... It is clear that what is read is the thought of the writer, even if expressed in a slightly more colorful manner. I believe that basically each of us makes our passion available, like when watching matches at a bar... it happens that people argue, but the next day that's it, we have a beer together and we've forgotten about it. Some cheer for Abel, some cheer for Renner, and some don't cheer at all.... For Steinway Hamburg, for example, I would always and only use the original hammer rail, which is made by Renner as everyone knows.

Another factor is cost; it is clear that the original hammer rail for Steinway costs 750 euros plus VAT, while an Abel type for Steinway costs less than half.... so whoever reads can evaluate and form an idea of what the advantages and disadvantages of a technical intervention proposal are.... personally, I see nothing wrong with it.

Talking about conspiracies in the shadows seems excessive to me; it almost seems as if someone pushed Vantir to write certain things, but I don't believe so.

At the time of judgment, if there is a public interest in the news, truth, and sincerity in the exposition of the narrated facts, there is no crime.

The fundamental element upon which jurisprudence distinguishes the right to criticize from the offense of defamation, which is often discussed here, is not so much the subjectivity of the judgment expressed (matters that are difficult to determine), but rather the tone and manner of expressing the judgments.

As long as one does not offend with gratuitous violence and vulgarity, any opinion on a piano hammer can be expressed calmly without there being a crime.

(Not to mention the possibility of provocation...

599 Code of Criminal Procedure paragraph 2 :

"One who has committed any of the acts provided for by articles 594 and 595 in a state of anger determined by an unjust act of another, and immediately following it, is not punishable."
)

Anyway, guys, if Abel or Renner gets angry because we post a photo of their hammers (but they are always here watching...?), that's their business personally.

No, perhaps you still haven't understood, I think even the walls have understood... These are not their business, they are my business that I have to endure; they are not Celibidache's business, nor GiovanniG's, so as I said, I repeat: I no longer want to read defamatory topics regarding ANY brand, otherwise I will delete the discussion and ban the direct parties involved.

Celibidache wrote:

Constitutionally speaking, an individual has the freedom to say that: "Battleship Potemkin... is a total load of crap!" without committing any crime, provided that this statement is not presented as an absolute and indisputable truth, but who ever presents themselves in such a way?

You have presented yourselves in this way in this and other discussions. Now enough! If you then think that this is a regime dictatorship, you are quite free to think so; take your things, your convictions, and go create problems in other forums with other administrators if you don't like how we manage things here; since, I repeat, this is a private space, you have consented to respect a netiquette. Beyond this, the fact remains that I do not want to get into trouble for things written by you. End of story and let's close this matter here, it's better that way.

TheSimon wrote:

You have presented yourselves this way in this and other discussions. Now enough!

Never happened... What defamatory topics?

In any case, you are speaking in the present about past facts: as far as I am concerned, I repeat, I will never enter into the subject again.

I hope this is simple to understand.

Better this way

Alright, I do not share your point of view because it limits freedom of opinion, but it is clear to me and I accept it. You will have nothing more to worry about regarding my interventions.

Limiting your freedom of opinion means, for me, having a quiet life without having to worry about people breathing down my neck and having to pay lawyers (it has already happened in the past and cost me an arm and a leg; I would say I already spend enough on this forum and I think that's enough).

giovannig wrote:

You will no longer have anything to worry about regarding my interventions.

Ok thanks

Dear Celibidache,

I am reading your post with interest, albeit with only one eye. My right eye underwent surgery yesterday for retinal detachment... but everything seems fine. So, I am a bit tired. We can certainly express opinions as you say. I also want to tell you that I know the Renner company well. I knew Mr. Costanzo, who spoke Italian very well and is now retired, and I know Ms. Cazzaniga very well, with whom I have spoken many times. I appreciate their hammers not just a little, but immensely. I knew very well the then-company Samima, which imported their material in Turin. Since the Neirotti Brothers company ceased operations, Piatino has been a most worthy representative-importer. I greatly appreciate your company. I have always had excellent experiences recommending that friends install Renner hammers and Renner actions. The quality and precision of their workmanship is famous in Europe and throughout the world. I never managed to visit the factory, which I now know has moved and permanently regrouped near Stuttgart. So, as you can see, there is a long-standing relationship of acquaintance with this excellent company. Renner is capable of building "custom" hammers according to the specifications of piano manufacturers, and many large companies install Renner actions specifically built for them. Abel, a younger company, has had a positive evolution in hammer production and also reproduces products with great care based on customer indications, starting, in my opinion, from different principles. For example, they make hammers, as I have noted in my long research/study, with pre-determined compression, more "ready to use," which, however, if taken and installed without being expressly requested, may prove unsuitable for certain instruments. Choosing, therefore, a hammer to replace (assuming that, as in your unfortunate case, one should or should not replace it), is not easy, and the technician must be expert and careful to recognize the specifications. It is certainly true, and so it must be, that if a piano was fitted with Renner, it would be better, I would say obligatory, to replace it with Renner and so on. It depends on how one chooses. Therefore, I agree and I perceive in your words not judgment, but discernment. Unfortunately, one must forget the setbacks, even if someone has ruined our beloved instrument. There is a remedy for everything, as they say. Bye, and greetings also to giovannig, who argues the history well and even remembers the Schwander, the glorious action fitted by Bechstein. Also Simone, as Administrator of this Forum and a competent pianist and sound engineer, says in my opinion right and prudent things, and I seem to recognize in his words an acceptance of open opinions. One always starts again from the beginning and, each in their own way, we engage positively and, why not, even "intensely." Greetings to all, Paolo

Sorry about the retinal detachment, bad thing! I agree with what was expressed.

Wishes for a speedy recovery.

Thanks giovannig, anyway everything is fine: operated on yesterday morning. It will take me a few days of patience and a cocktail of eye drops!!