PROFILE
DE PACHMANN AND THE PIANO
By
Prof. Carl Abbott, MD, FRCP, FACP
|
This article is chapter 8 of Prof. Abbott's upcoming book entitled "De Pachmann on Stage". The Ambassadors Magazine published chapter 6 of his book in the previous issue. All information published here is copyrighted © 2003 |
Much of the story so far has been concerning de Pachmann’s concert tours and his stage behavior. Just as interesting is an examination of his relationship with piano makers throughout his career. During his early years in Russia and as a student in Vienna as well as during his professional career from 1882 to 1925, he played thousands of concerts and recitals, on pianos of many different manufacturers some of which he personally endorsed or promoted. These included pianos made by Ascherberg, Baldwin, Bechstein, Broadwood, Brinsmeade, Bluthner, Bell, Heintzmann, Chickering, Steinway and Williams. He also endorsed the Pianola, the player piano.
We know nothing about the type of pianos which were available for his use in his early years in Odessa. On his return from Vienna in 1870, he participated in several concerts which were reviewed in the Novorossijsky Telegraph. . The critic at the first of two concerts was critical of his performance but the piano was considered to be part of the problem. It was, “a wonderful grand ……but distinguished by uncommonly full and dense tone. This feature makes it a player’s duty to use the pedal very skilfully and carefully. Mr. Pachmann did not have enough time to get acquainted with this detail”. The piano, likely of German make, “ had only recently appeared in Odessa”. The second recital was also not a success because, “Mr. Pachmann played such a bad piano that it seemed that the little piano hammers were striking wooden sticks not strings. If it is true that it was a Playel, then the piano must have taken a long promenade around the city for hire since it has turned into a dulcimer”.
The close relationship between pianists and piano manufacturers of Europe and North America goes back to the latter part of the 1800s. In 1872, Anton Rubinstein’s concert tour of North America was financed by the Steinway Company. Over the next twenty years, Chickering & Sons sponsored tours of North America by Hans von Bulow (1875) and Rafael Joseffy (1879). Louis Gottschalk and Sigismond Thalberg had earlier agreed to use Chickering pianos in the 1850s while touring America. Josef Hoffman crossed the Atlantic in 1887 under the sponsorship of the Weber Piano Company and in 1891 Steinway financed similar tours by Ferruccio Busoni, Arthur Friedheim and Ignacy Paderewski. When Tchaikovsky visited the USA in 1887 his tour was promoted by William Krabe and Company. The US visit (1910 –1911) of Sergi Rachmaninoff was under the auspices of the Mason and Hamlin Company. The more popular the pianist the more valuable the testimonials for the sponsor. The advertising was used to confirm the integrity and quality of the piano maker. The tours were usually arranged for a specific number of concerts for prearranged fees. In 1891, Paderewski was to give twenty four North American concerts in almost as many days. During Anton Rubinstein’s tour in 1872, he played an amazing 215 concerts. Newspaper advertisements for these tours, as well as for visits of pianists to European cities usually included the comment: “the piano is a Baldwin” or “Steinway piano used exclusively”, which usually meant that the pianist had agreed not to play on any other instrument during that tour. That also meant that the tour sponsor usually undertook to make available or sometimes to move a suitable piano around the country with the soloist to ensure that an appropriate instrument was always available.
Anton Rubinstein’s 1886 London recitals were given on pianos built in Russia by J. Becker of St. Petersburg, likely brought to London specifically for his use. Franz Liszt, during his visit to London in 1886, used and endorsed several makes. He played on a Broadwood and although his favourite piano was said to be the French piano, Erart, an advertisement for Bechstein in the Times during his visit described its piano as “Liszt’s favourite piano” and boasted that the company was also “pianoforte manufacturer to the Queen”. Queen Victoria had already acquired Bechstein and Steinway pianos earlier and was soon to have an Ibach as well, so it seems obvious that Queen Victoria possessed several different pianos at that time, as she was herself an amateur pianist. At the same time that de Pachmann was making his reputation playing in Europe, there was keen competition between piano makers from Europe and other countries. Not only did their advertisements in the local newspapers contain written endorsements by visiting pianists but it was also the fashion to list the names of the rich and famous, Royal families and heads of state who possessed their pianos. The Steinway Company’s impressive list included Czar Nicolas II of Russia, William II then Emperor of Germany, as mentioned Queen Victoria of Britain, the Queen of Spain, the Kings of Italy, Saxony and others. It is likely that many of these pianos were personal gifts from the makers. Beethoven, no less, was given a six-octave grand Broadwood pianoforte in 1818, after Thomas Broadwood had visited the composer in Vienna. Even before the instrument had arrived, Beethoven on February 7th wrote to thank Broadwood as follows:
“ My very dear Broadwood, I have never felt a greater pleasure than your honours intimation of the arrival of this piano, with which you are honouring me as a present. I shall look upon it as an altar upon which I shall place the most beautiful offerings of my spirit to the divine Apollo. As soon as I receive your excellent instrument, I shall immediately send you the fruits of the first moments of inspiration I spend at it, as a souvenir for you from me, my very dear B.; and I hope that they will be worthy of your instrument….My dear sir, accept my warmest consideration from your friend and very humble servant, Ludwig Van Beethoven”.
It is uncertain if Broadwood ever publicly used this letter to promote his pianos but it is clear that Beethoven’s letter could hardly be considered as an endorsement – sight unseen and sound unheard. De Pachmann in his advertisements promoted the Broadwood as did Maggie. The notice of a London concert on June 22 nd., 1886 stated that he would “play on one of Messrs. Broadwood and Sons’ concert grand pianofortes”. In the following year, Mme. de Pachmann was advertised to, “play upon John Broadwood and Sons’ Concert Iron-Grand Pianoforte”, at a concert at the Royal Albert Hall. When the de Pachmanns made their first Atlantic crossing to North America in 1890, their tour was sponsored by the Chickering Piano Company of America. The recital programmes for that tour show a photograph of De Pachmann seated at a piano which prominently displayed the name Chickering. De Pachmann’s enthusiasm for the Chickering pianos was sufficient enough during this first USA tour that he addressed a letter handwritten in German to Messrs Chickering and Sons, dated New York, April 12, 1890. The letter was translated and published as follows:
“As it is my intention to take with me to Europe, for my personal use, a concert grand, I beg you will acquaint me with the artist price of the same. The Chickering pianos are the noblest products of the piano makers’ art, and respond, as no others do, to every requirement of the most exacting virtuoso; in other words, they attain the highest point of perfection and are the model instruments of the world”.
Respectfully yours,
Vladimir de Pachmann
The Chickering Company published a second letter written from Saratoga, in the
Catskills of New York State, on August 25, 1890 after what they referred to as,
“a few months’ sojourn ….during which Mr. de Pachmann acquired a closer
acquaintance with the Chickering piano”. The de Pachmann’s tour of New York
and Boston had finished in May of that year and Maggie had returned to England
alone. The Chickering Company was able to report:
“having given upwards of one hundred concerts with the Chickering Piano and tested its merits in every way, the world renowned virtuoso wrote to Chickering & Sons as follows: ‘The Chickering Piano rightfully stands alone for on this earth it is not only unsurpassed but unequalled. I can give logical and esthetic proofs of my assertion. When one asks: why do these unique manufacturers attain perfection? The answer is: because they have endeavoured to secure (as no others have done) and have succeeded in securing the nearest possible approach to the tone of nature, to what is known as the human voice; the Chickering Piano sings like a lovely voice. This is no compliment but the expression of my innermost conviction, if I may harbour an opinion on the subject’ ”.
Both letters of testimony were later printed in recital programmes and must have had great promotional value. The Chickering Company went on to sponsor two further North American tours for de Pachmann: in 1892 and the 1893-94 tour.
The moods of de Pachmann could never be predicted and a story in Musical America in 1909 describes an event which occurred during his 1907-1908 concert tour (sponsored on this occasion by Baldwin ), “in a certain town in the West”. When arriving on stage, de Pachmann, it was reported-
“discovered that the local agent with wonderful enterprise had hung an enormous sign on the piano with the word ‘Chickering’. De Pachmann suddenly rose up, tore the sign from the instrument and did an Indian war dance on it till he had broken it up in pieces. Then he sat down at the piano and played more finely than ever”
The Musical America article also states that,
“afterward, he wrote the late Frank C. Chickering, the head of the Chickering house, a letter of explanation, in which he said that he was proud to play the Chickering piano but that he would not be ticketed as an employee of a pianoforte concern. Mr. Chickering, who was a type of gentleman of the old school, whose sympathies were always with the artists, wrote back a most pleasant and amiable letter, in which he said that he thoroughly appreciated Mr. de Pachmann’s attitude – but thanked God that he had danced on the sign instead of the piano”.
De Pachmann, during a concert at Chickering Hall, soon after the death of the Chickering patriarch was announced, was moved to “play a funeral march (of Chopin ) in his memory”.
During his visits to the US, de Pachmann spent many summers in the Catskills. His 1899-1900 visit was under the sponsorship of the Steinway Company. In an interview with the Worcester Spy in Sept. 1899, when asked where and how he had spent his summer, he replied,
“in the Catskills at a little place in the backwoods. Did I play? Not very much; it was too hot. All your America is very hot in summer I think. But I had a Steinway grand and could I help play with such an instrument in the room?….Ah, the Steinway. What a piano! Write this down - it is divine; it is the finest in the world – I could not leave it. I can remember the pianos of 25 years ago; but what a development since. There is nothing so beautiful in touch, so beautiful in tone. Ach! That touch and tone. Mozart and Beethoven, could they hear their compositions performed on a modern piano would not know them for theirs. The tears would flow from their eyes and run down their cheeks, to hear them”.
A marvellous endorsement indeed ! As mentioned, he played on a variety of makes of pianos in his recitals in London and Europe. When he lived in Leipzig, he likely used the Bluthner, as the Company had a manufacturing plant in that city. In the years 1880-1890 the Company made an average of 1000 pianos annually, second only in Germany to Bechstein. (The Piano: A History by Cyril Ehrich. Clarendon Press. 1990, Oxford.). The Bluthner Company once advertised in the London Times that it was, “the sole maker to the Leipzig Conservatory”. In London, each concert hall had its own specific pianos for the use of performing artists although they did sometimes specify in their advertisements the piano to be used by specific pianists. Mark Hambourg’s on July 3rd, 1909 programme at Queen’s Hall (which was leased by Chappell & Co. Ltd.) stated that he would play on a Bluthner. On June 20th., a year later, de Pachmann was to play on “a Bechstein grand pianoforte” at the Royal Albert Hall. In London, Steinway Hall of course always provided their own pianos.
It comes as no surprise that keyboard artists would have their individual preferences. Chopin himself endorsed the Pleyel pianoforte (as noted in Frederic Chopin by Bernard Gavoty, Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1977, New York), as Liszt did the Erard. Clara Schumann in 1839 was visiting Paris as an acknowledged celebrity and was offered the use of a piano from the makers of both the Erard and Pleyel. Reich in her biography of Clara Schumann (cited below) says that Clara favoured the Pleyel. Clara and Robert Schumann’s diaries, kept during their travels through Russia in 1844, record that Clara was always interested in the quality of pianos that she saw and used during her tour.(see The Marriage Diaries of Clara and Robert Schumann, ed. by Gerd Nauhaus, translated from German by Peter Oswald. Northeastern University Press. Boston. 1993). She had broken off relations with her father, Friedrich Wieck, after deciding to marry Robert without her father’s approval. Wieck, who had been in the piano business in Liepzig, had refused to allow Clara to take possession of her favourite piano, made by the German firm, Conrad Graf. Clara tried several pianos during her Russian tour, including a Talavnov in Moscow, which she described as “nice but enormously expensive” (1000 rubles). She played a concert on a Hartel piano, built in Hamburg, which she wrote “did not turn out well – terribly heavy”. The Wirth Company had supplied her with “a beautiful grand piano”, for her apartment in St. Petersburg, which she must have liked very much, as she finally purchased one before leaving, for the sum of 1200 rubles. She had also tried a Broadwood and a Lichenthal, which she wrote, “compared to those by Wirth, we did not like very much”.
Many concert pianists have allowed piano makers to quote their testimonials in their promotion materials. During the concert career of Wilhelm Backhaus, the Chappell Piano Company of London advertisements quoted him as saying, “I cannot speak too highly of the brilliance and sympathetic tone and responsive touch. You need fear no rival”. For de Pachmann, however, his excursions in the area of piano promotion landed him in hot water on more than one occasion. On his 1907-1908 American Farewell Tour, he was of course committed to play his sponsor’s Baldwin pianos exclusively as he had on his previous two tours. Before leaving London, he had been quoted in an article he wrote for The Strand (November, 1907, page 420) entitled, “How to play Chopin”, as endorsing the Bechstein piano. In fact, his comment was made in reference to the improvements made in piano manufacturing techniques since the time of Chopin that allowed special tonal effects:
“This effect must have been very difficult on the old pianos but it can be easily accomplished on, for instance, the Bechstein of today, which is the piano upon which I always play.”
Two of his last three concerts in London, at the Queen’s and Royal Albert Halls, prior to his leaving for New York, had been given on Bechstein pianos. After six months in America playing on a Baldwin, he was obliged to write a letter to The Musical Courier on January 21, 1908 with an obviously naive explanation, which read as follows:
“With reference to your editorial comments in the last issue on the article which appeared in the The Musical Courier Thanksgiving issue of the Strand, a London publication, permit me to say that I had no idea that this magazine circulates in the United States as well as in England, and my referring to the Bechstein piano applied to Europe only and as such should not be construed to the disadvantage of the Baldwin piano, which I have been using on my last two American tours. I consider the Baldwin one of the few really great pianos of the world and in selecting this instrument for my American tours, I was guided solely by my artistic instincts and by no business motives.
In Europe I play the Bechstein piano and in the United States I play the Baldwin, because in these two pianos I find the qualities which suit my artistic requirements the best and because I derive real enjoyment in playing these superb instruments.
Had I known that copies of the Strand are sold in the United States, I would have surely mentioned the Baldwin piano in the article referred to, as well as the Bechstein.
Artists identified with two pianos in their concert work can well be proud”.
Very truly yours,
Vladimir de Pachmann
The Musical Courier comment was:
“this is all excellent, but a reference to our Montreal letter of this week will show that de Pachmann has been playing another piano in that city. That makes three pianos contemporaneously. Really, these matters, as they come to the daylight through the efforts of The Musical Courier, are beginning to illustrate the unfathomable depth to which this piano playing manoeuvring has descended. De Pachmann is no worse and no better than the type of European pianists that come here to exploit pianos and go to any country at so much money. It is lucky for him that he had the Baldwin piano in this country, because he might have had another one”.
The letter mentioned above was written by Harry B. Cohen in The Musical Courier and referred to a de Pachmann concert given at Stanley Hall in Montreal, during the same tour, on January 23, 1908. That recital was played on a concert grand piano made by Heintzmann & Company of Toronto. Cohen had described the recital as,
“the best program Montrealers have heard this season. (He) was in exceptionally fine mood, playing the entire program with rare musicianship and he was applauded to the echo and had to give no less than five encores. But de Pachmann’s visit, I cannot say was for the sake of showing his art of piano playing but for the purpose of advertising a Canadian piano – which can be proved by the fact that an advertisement appeared in a daily paper, that de Pachmann, the great Chopin exponent, ‘will play on a Heintzman piano’ – this piano being for sale at a certain local dealer’s. This advertisement appeared long before de Pachmann was advertised. I do not see any reason, or any logical pretence for a pianist of de Pachmnn’s calibre to go from one place to another and advertise pianos”.
Cohen asks the question:
“if violinists or violoncellists of renown do not do so, why should a pianist do so? Ask Ysaye, Kreisler, Kubelik about their instrument and each of these artists will tell you that their instrument is the best in existence and they have a right to say so because those instruments have made each individually famous and they have a right to pronounce their instruments the ‘best’ and nothing can persuade these artists to play on any other instrument. Then why should a pianist when he has chosen a certain instrument, not play the same instrument anywhere and everywhere? As it is, it looks as though the pianist is a ‘clown’ and goes around from place to place advertising a patent medicine and it is certainly of no musical value, nor can the art of that pianist be looked upon as serious.”
De Pachmann had been in Toronto earlier and had given a recital at Massey Hall on January 27 th. The Heintzmann Piano Company had advertised his visit on January 22nd as follows:
“Vladimir de Pachmann, the greatest of all Chopin players, demands a responsive instrument. This great King of the Keyboard has selected for his tour in Canada a Heintzmann & Co piano. A signal honor has thus been conferred and a notable tribute paid to Canadian excellence in piano manufacture. Everyone should hear de Pachmann at Massey Hall on Monday Eve., Jan.27th”.
The February 1st., 1908 issue of the Toronto weekly Saturday Night had also carried an advertisement for the Heintzman and Company piano which read as follows:
“You heard de Pachmann at Massey Hall on Monday evening? Was there ever such work done on a piano? Applause following applause greeted the closing numbers of Chopin on the program, compelling this master pianist to return to the piano three times after the program ended – and when de Pachmann finally retired from the platform the great audience stood in the hall wanting more."
De Pachmann appreciates to what extent The Heintzman & Co piano used on Monday evening gave additional lustre to the recital. He has said:
‘To think that I have travelled the world over and used the finest pianos, then to reach Canada and discover in the Heintzman & Co piano a veritable prince among pianos compared with any I have ever used’.
The advertisement concluded with a final message from the Heintzman Company:
“Canada is ever forging ahead and is surely at the top in the building of a high class piano”
%201911.jpg)
One can see the point that Harry Cohen in Montreal was
making and he may not have known about de Pachmann’s Toronto promotion when he
wrote these comments. Arthur Friedheim, in his book, Life and Liszt: the
recollections of a concert pianist (edited by Theodore L. Bullock. Taplinger
Publishing Co. Inc. N.Y. 1961) mentions, “on my Canadian tour I used the
Heintzmann, a very good Canadian instrument, to save Steinway and Sons the great
expense of shipping my own piano from town to town”. It is possible that the
Baldwin firm used the same strategy during the de Pachmann’s 1908 visit. For
his 1911-12 tour of Canada, Baldwin arranged for the use of another Canadian
piano, the New Scale Williams, manufactured in Toronto by the firm of RS
Williams and Sons, Co., Ltd. The 1911-12 North America tour began in Toronto on
September 27th. An advertisement in the Toronto News of
Sept.23rd. announced that he would play at Massey Hall and that, “the piano he
had selected for this occasion is none other than the New Scale Williams,
Canada’s greatest piano”. De Pachmann moved on to Ottawa, where he also
played on a New Scale Williams, again in Montreal as well as in the Ontario
cities of London and Hamilton.
Returning to New York, he was to play a Baldwin again. In an advertisement in the New York Times on October 19th. 1911, he was quoted as saying, “the Baldwin piano has a tone and touch like no other. It is a magnificent instrument. I play two recitals on it with less fatigue than on any other pianos I have ever used”. The Montreal recital on October 3rd. was unique because of the antics of ‘a tortoiseshell cat’, which had wandered on stage during the performance and, “who insisted upon showing her appreciation by rubbing against the musician’s legs through the encore waltz. From every part of the auditorium this feline friend of music witnessed this performance”. The above quotations are from the review of de Pachmann’s recital as reported by the Montreal Gazette on the following day.
De Pachmann continued to endorse Baldwin pianos in numerous
advertisements. In 1925, a Company ad stated, “Vladimir de Pachmann loves the
Baldwin piano. Through the medium of Baldwin tone, this most lyric of
contemporary pianists discovers complete revealment of his musical dreams. For a
generation de Pachmann has played the Baldwin; on the concert stage and in his
home”. This ad also included a signed testimonial as follows: “…….it
cries when I feel like crying, it sings joyfully when I feel like singing. It
responds - like a human being – to every mood. I love the Baldwin Piano”.
After giving two recitals in Philadelphia in mid-December
of 1911, de Pachmann resumed his Canadian tour by travelling by train to
Winnipeg, Manitoba, where he was to play at the Central Church on December 26th.
He arrived exhausted and in a bad mood, “De Pachmann on Stage”. He was
announced in the Manitoba
“One feels that it would not be fair to overlook some reference to the instrument supplied by the New Scale Williams Piano Co for the recital. The beautiful ringing tone and the satisfactory way in which the instrument responded to all the demands upon it was a tribute to the manufacturer”.
Piano dealers in Calgary and Edmonton promoted de Pachmann
and the Williams piano in their ads with such advice as, “follow the greatest
living player of the piano in your choice of an instrument” ( Edmonton
Journal ) as well as, “note the incomparable beauty of tone from his
piano, the New Scale Williams, used exclusively on the Canadian tour of this
greatest of living pianists” ( Calgary Daily Herald, Dec.28,1911). The
final Canadian stop was in Vancouver where he played on the 30th. The
Vancouver News reported a very successful recital at the Opera House, by,
“a grand old man…..with masterly playing and a quaint personality”. The
reviewer concluded with the comment,
“The pianoforte used was a New Scale Williams and the sympathetic bass in the
Prelude as well as the Berceuse effects in the treble were notably good”. De
Pachmann appears never to have mentioned this highly rated Canadian piano again
but he did mention their rival, Heintzmann, in a conversation with Harold Bauer
circa 1925 (cited by Mark Mitchell in Vladimir de Pachmann ; a piano
virtuoso’s life and art,
“The piano is so beautiful. I like Steinway. What is this piano, I always forget. O yes, Baldwin. But the finest piano in the world I find in Canada. What was that piano Pallottelli? Heintzmann. Yes. Heintzmann is the finest piano in the world”.
For de Pachmann any piano that was new and different was worthy of praise. On tour he was obligated to praise and promote the piano that had been chosen and this what he usually did. In doing so he was no different from most musician of his day. He could hardly resist endorsing any new piano. English pianos made by the John Brinsmead and Sons firm were promoted in that country as, “the premier instruments of British manufacture” in their advertisements, having won first prize at both the 1880 Sydney and 1883 Amsterdam Exhibitions. In a 1909 advertisement, de Pachmann was quoted as stating the Brinsmeads to be, “truly matchless pianos”.
De Pachmann was also full of praise for the Pianola. In a San Francisco newspaper advertisement in 1905, he was quoted as stating:
“I have heard many piano-playing attachments but the Pianola is the only one which can be considered really musical. None but a great artist could play with such delicacy or power. I wish to add my testimony as to its excellence, both for professional use in reading elaborate piano compositions and for private use in educating the musical tastes of people who have pianos and are unable to use them for want of a thorough musical training. I am astonished at the possibilities of the Pianola, whose playing has the characteristics of the work of human fingers.”
In 1907, the Etude magazine published a critical editorial about the custom of piano promotion by pianists. In addition, the critic W.J. Henderson, writing in the NY Sunday Times on November 19th, 1899, spent part of his weekly “Themes and Topics In the Musical World” on the subject of piano makers’ sponsorships of visiting pianists from Europe. Much of what he had to say applied to a host of pianists as well as de Pachmann.
“What is it that is so reprehensible in the habits of the professional pianist? It is the custom of hiring himself out to a piano manufacturer."
“There are a few rules to which there are no exceptions. Here is one of them. When a piano virtuoso comes to America for the first time he is hired to do so by some piano maker and he comes under contract to play on this maker’s instrument. He is also under agreement to write a letter at the end of the season saying that he is satisfied that this is the best piano made in this country. The fact that he has not played on any other is of no significance. Sometimes the pianist is sufficiently successful to come a second time without an engagement by a piano house but this is rare. He is a good deal more likely to be bought up by some other house and to come a second time to play on another piano and to write a letter that this one is the best. One pianist did even worse than that. After playing a whole season on one brand of piano he was led away by the maker of another just before he returned to Europe and wrote a letter of recommendation for the second instrument declaring it to be the finest made in this country. Considering the fact that all his expenses had been paid through the season by the maker of the first piano, this was at least ungrateful. But such things are not unheard of and yet we wonder that some pianists show no soul in their playing.”
“It is not only true that most of the pianists who come from abroad come under contract to play and praise certain instruments but nearly every pianist of prominence in this country is under a similar contract. I do not say that all are because I chance to know who are not. But most of them are. If you will take the trouble to read the advertisements of the different piano makers you will find that they all have their lists of prominent players who declare that, ‘the _____ piano is the most satisfactory instrument in the American market. I prefer it to all others,’ or words to that effect. Now, sometimes of course this statement is quite true but in many cases it is not. The pianist often knows that he is not playing on the best instrument made in America nor on one at all good but he is well paid for playing on a poor one and he praises it because that is part of the bargain. The maker’s position in the matter is a natural one.”
Henderson also discusses the role the piano plays in the quality of the individual performance and notes that musical criticism’s unwritten law is that nothing must be said about the piano in reviews. As we saw, the rules in Canada were occasionally bent.
“I have taken the trouble to set forth the position of the brotherhood of commentators because I have been asked several times of late why I condemned any pianist’s tone when, as my correspondent thought, the fault lay in the piano on which he played. I sincerely hope that the critics will never abandon their present attitude in this matter. If a pianist sells his soul to an instrument that should be in the inferno, then let him take the consequences. A violinist spends a large sum of money to procure the finest instrument he can obtain. If he can get a noble-toned Stradivarius or a fine old Guanerius or Stainer he will spend his last cent on it and rejoice ever afterward in the responsive singing of it under his bow. Stradivarius and Guanerius and Stainer are dead and buried centuries ago and their instruments do not have to be advertised. Neither are they in a position to hire people to play upon their productions. So the violinist is not tempted and he does not become a marketable commodity. A cello player tries to get the best cello and a viola player tries to secure the best viola. But a pianist is for sale to the pianomaker who will give him the best terms for playing on an instrument no matter how poor it may be.”
To give de Pachmann his due, he did not always expect or receive compensation for all the praise he heaped on every piano manufacturer. An example came to light after his 1911-1912 North American tour. He had been playing in Toronto where he had renewed his friendship with Michael Hombourg, founder of the Hombourg Conservatory of that city. At a social gathering at Hombourg’s home de Pachmann was prepared to entertain.
The Vancouver World on October 19,1912 described the occasion as follows:
“De Pachmann approached the piano looking rather dubious, having never met with one of the same make in his career. It was the “New Art” Bell piano.
However, he sat down and struck a few chords. In a second he was on his feet looking at the instrument in amazement. Then he walked all around it, taking oin its every detail. Again he sat down and this time he played and played as though inspired for over an hour. Finally when the last soft note had died away and he was about to leave, in his enthusiastic foreign way and almost with reverence, this old man who has swayed vast audiences with his divine music, bent over and kissed the piano goodbye.
Maybe it seems to the reader an extravagant bit of emotion. Not at all! It was the great artist’s love of what to him is more than life – music, that prompted it. Can you imagine a higher tribute to any piano?
Indeed it did not end there, as there was a sequel. That little episode was on a Saturday evening. Well, on Sunday evening the manager of the Bell piano was called up by telephone. It was de Pachmann who wanted to meet him. The Toronto man went down to the King Edward (Hotel) and spent the evening with the musician and a few privileged beings. At the supper table at the close of the evening de Pachmann rose to his feet and raising his glass he gave a toast – to the “New Art” Bell piano”.
The Bell Organ and Piano Company of Guelph, Ontario, established in 1864, advertised itself as “the largest makers of pianos in Canada” but as Wayne Kelly points out in his book, Downright Upright; A History of the Canadian Piano Industry. (Natural Heritage/Natural History Inc. 1991, Toronto) other manufacturers made similar claims. Although the temptation to use de Pachmann’s testimony in advertising must have been strong, there is no evidence the Bell firm ever did.
Copyright © ECA
Credits for illustrations:
Prof. Edward Carl Abbott is a
distinguished Canadian physician who received his MD from Dalhousie University in 1959 and has worked in Nova Scotia, Newfoundland, Ontario.
and in the Royal Post-Graduate Medical School in London, UK. He
has published papers about the Austrian musician Mozart, British novelist Charles
Dickens, and Russian musician Vladimir de Pachmann. His email is
cabbott@is.dal.ca
