studi musicali - Patrizio Barbieri · studi musicali nuova serie. anno 04. 2013. numero 01 nuova...

studi musicali .

nuova serie .04 .

2013 .n. 01

studi musicalinuova serie . anno 04 . 2013 . numero 01nuova serie . anno 04 . 2013 . numero 01

Accademia Nazionale di Santa Cecilia . Fondazione

studi musicaliAccademia Nazionale di Santa Cecilia . www.santacecilia.it

9 788895 341514

ISBN 978-88-95341-51-4

ISSN 0391-7789

euro 50,00

......

Studi musicali. Nuova serieRivista semestrale di studi musicologici

DirettoreAgostino Ziino

RedazioneTeresa M. Gialdroni

Studi musicaliNuova serie, iv, 2013, n. 1

Questo volume è stato pubblicato in collaborazione con ARCUS SpA

Art DirectorSilvana Amato

ImpaginazioneRaffaella Barbetti

Composizione tipografica in Cycles di Summer Stone

«Studi musicali» pubblica articoli riguardanti tutti i campi della ricerca musicologica in italia-no, inglese, francese, tedesco e spagnolo. Gli articoli proposti per una eventuale pubblicazionepossono essere inviati in copia cartacea al seguente indirizzo: Agostino Ziino, Via GiovanniAntonelli, 21, 00197 Roma, e, in allegato a una e-mail, all’indirizzo [email protected] pubblicazione è subordinata al parere di due studiosi specializzati cui l’articolo sarà sot-toposto in forma anonima. Una volta accettato, l’articolo dovrà essere redatto secondo lenorme editoriali della rivista disponibili in italiano e in inglese al seguente indirizzo:http://studimusicali.santacecilia.it.

Per gli annunci pubblicitari rivolgersi all’indirizzo [email protected]

Nessuna parte di questo periodico può essere riprodotta o trasmessa in qualsiasi forma ocon qualsiasi mezzo elettronico, meccanico o altro senza l’autorizzazione scrittadei proprietari dei diritti e dell’editore

issn 0391-7789isbn 978-88-95341-51-4

© 2013 Accademia Nazionale di Santa Cecilia – Fondazione, RomaTutti i diritti riservati

www.santacecilia.itstudimusicali.santacecilia.itstudimusicali@santacecilia.it

Soci Fondatori dell’Accademia Nazionale di Santa CeciliaIstituzionali: Stato Italiano, Roma capitale, Provincia di Roma, Camera di Commercio diRoma, Regione Lazio, Privati: enel, bnl-Paribas, Telecom, Autostrade per l’Italia, Astaldi, Poste Italiane, Ferrovie dello StatoSponsor istituzionale: LottomaticaMedia Sponsor: La Repubblica

007 Alejandro PlanchartThe Geography of Italian Proper Tropes

039 Anthony CummingsOn the Testimony of Fragments (or, Alessandro Striggio the Elder and the Genesis of the Genere Concitato)

061 Warren KirkendaleZu Handschriften von Händel und Caldara in der Santini-Sammlung

077 Berthold OverEmanuele d’Astorga und Marchese Francesco Maria Ruspoli

101 Thomas GriffinSome Late Scarlatti Recovered: Part Two of Alessandro Scarlatti’s Serenata Erminia (1723)

115 Laurie McManusHearing and Seeing Nineteenth-Century Augenmusik: the Case of Brahms’s Requiem

145 Patrizio BarbieriThe Italian piano: laborious industrial growth 1810-2010

2030 Daniela TortoraDa * selon Sade a La Passion selon X. Intorno alla Passion selon Sade di Sylvano Bussotti

Sommario

The Italian piano: laborious industrial growth 1810-2010Patrizio Barbieri

The following outline deals with the evolution of the Italian piano and its posi-tion on the world stage from a technological and industrial point of view.Although much more distinguished in the violin- and harpsichord-making sec-tor, Italy’s role in the modern piano industry is not negligible. Indeed, thePeninsula is numbered by Alfred Dolge among the six countries included in hisauthoritative Pianos and their makers: and this was in 1911, at the time when theinstrument invented by Bartolomeo Cristofori was at its most popular.1Despite this fact, it should immediately be added that in this context Italy wasconsiderably behindhand, in both quality and technological aspects, as com-pared to the five nations then leading the sector: the United States, Germany,Great Britain, France, and Austria. It should also be remembered that,although like the first two countries mentioned Italy’s industry developed onlyduring the second half of the nineteenth century, during the period from 1870to 1910 annual production in the United States rose from 24,000 to 370,000pianos and in Germany from 15,000 to 120,000, whereas Italy never exceeded7,000 units. Unlike the countries just mentioned, the first real internationally

145

1 Alfred Dolge, Pianos and their makers, Covina, California, Covina Publishing Company,1911 (reprint New York, Dover Publications, 1972).

appreciated concert grand piano made in Italy only appeared starting from1981, thanks to Paolo Fazioli.

In about 1980-90, limiting the comparison to other western countries, Italy’sposition improved slightly even in the sector of upright pianos, not only as aresult of the instrument’s by now stabilised characteristics, but in particular fol-lowing the scaling-down of the major western industries after market invasionby Asiatic entrepreneurs. The latters’ overwhelming power, in the late twentiethcentury, reached numerical proportions never before recorded. Let it sufficethat, in the mid-seventies, the Japanese company Yamaha produced around200,000 pianos per year, to conclude that in five years this single firm made moreinstruments – and, we may add, on the whole of better quality – than Italy man-aged to manufacture from the times of Cristofori to the present day.2

Having thus outlined the scenario, let us now glance at the criteria used tocarry out this survey.3 Production data is difficult to quantify, since Italy – unlikeother leading countries in the sector – has never had a manufacturers’ associationwith updated registers, so that statistics are largely based on the accurate importand export data published annually, previously by the Ministry of Finance andnow by the Central Statistics Bureau (Ufficio Centrale di Statistica). As regardsthe quality aspect on the other hand, reference is made to the results achieved atItalian exhibitions (initially regional, then nationwide) and more particularly –for the purpose of greater objectivity – at the major international exhibitions of

2 For data relating to Yamaha see Cyril Ehrlich, Pianoforte, in The New Grove Dictionary ofMusic and Musicians, London, Macmillan, 1980, xiv, §8-9, pp. 704-710: 710 (in any absolute sense,Yamaha’s is the highest production level ever achieved by any factory). In 1922, annual produc-tion in the United States had risen to 430,000 pianos: [Raffaello De Rensis]Cento anni di CasaAnelli, organi e pianoforti 1836-1936,Cremona, Cremona Nuova, 1936, p. 89.3 An information about manufacturers mentioned can be found in: Encyclopedia of keyboardinstruments. Volume 1: The piano, ed. Robert Palmieri, New York & London, Garland, 1994 (here-after Enc1994); entries reproduced, after possible updating, in The Piano. An Encyclopedia, Secondedition, ed. Robert Palmieri, New York & London, Routledge, 2003. Further information can befound inAnnarita Colturato, L’industria dei pianoforti a Torino nell’ Ottocento, in Miscellaneadi studi. 3, a c. di Alberto Basso, Torino, Centro Studi Piemontesi, 1991, pp. 43-61; FrancescaSeller, I pianoforti napoletani nel XIX secolo, «Fonti musicali italiane», xiv, 2009, pp. 171-199 (anarticle also containing a dictionary of the piano makers in Naples); Annalisa Bini, Testimoni-anze sui costruttori di pianoforti italiani nell’Archivio dell’Accademia di Santa Cecilia, in Musica seextendit ad omnia. Studi in onore di Alberto Basso in occasione del suo 75° compleanno, a c. di Rosy Moffae Sabrina Saccomanni, Lucca, Libreria Musicale Italiana, 2007, ii, pp. 687-694.

patrizio barbieri

146

London, Paris, and Vienna (1851-1900). The prizes obtained at the latter – not neg-ative, but rarely above a bronze medal – confirm that competition from othercountries continued to be an obstacle that Italy did not manage to overcome.

The results of our survey have been summarised in five sections: 1. The transi-tion from artisanal to industrial production; 2. Up to Italian Unification: the semi-industrial phase (analysed for each of the pre-unification states); 3. From Unifica-tion to the First World War: the industrialisation phase (collapse of Neapolitan pro-duction and development of northern Italy’s, especially in Turin); 4. Between theTwo Wars: the ‘commercial’ piano and the Great Depression; 5. The Second Post-WarPeriod: the advent of Asiatic industry and the birth of ‘Fazioli Pianoforti’.

§1. The transition from artisanal to industrial production

1.1. From harpsichord to piano. During the course of the eighteenth century, manyEuropean workshops changed gradually from harpsichord to piano production,like John Broadwood (Great Britain), the Stein family (Austria), Pascal Taskinand Sébastien Erard (France). In Italy, on the other hand, this did not occur. Onthe contrary, the most representative school of the sector, the Florentine work-shop of Bartolomeo Cristofori and his pupil Giovanni Ferrini, died out leavingno one sufficiently outstanding by dint of substantial design or productionprocess innovations.

One of the reasons for this lies in the fact that in 1737 the Grand Duchy of Tus-cany, following the destiny of other Italian states, became a prefecture of the Aus-trian government, which obviously sought to safeguard its own national indus-try (§2.3). A second can be found in the progressive deterioration of instrumen-tal music and the rise of the opera that took place all over the peninsula startingfrom the early decades of the eighteenth century and continued up to the procla-mation of the Kingdom of Italy (1861). A third reason includes a series of factorswhich, during this same transition period, were to prove disastrous for Italiancraftsmanship. In this connexion, it may be useful to make a comparisonbetween Vienna and Naples, which latter city, up to the Unification of Italy, wasnoted for the greatest production of pianos in the peninsula. The comparison isappropriate because (1) in both cities, even during the nineteenth century, pianoproduction remained at artisan or semi-artisan level (§2.2); (2) Naples was also

147

the italian piano: laborious industrial growth 1810-2010

the capital of an independent state, which was moreover the most technological-ly advanced in all Italy at that time. The reason for the net superiority of the Aus-trians is summarised in the following three paragraphs, documented in greaterdetail later in this article.

Materials.Whereas for harpsichord production at Naples only very few partshad to be imported, for pianos imports included ivories for key-covers, fir orspruce soundoards, felts, specially treated skins for the hammers, quality fishglue, steel strings (§3.1). To these were often added precious woods (such asmahogany and rosewood) for the cases, not painted and gilded like harpsichords,but made of exposed wood. Vienna, on the other hand, had factories that evenexported skins and steel strings (§3.3). The wood for soundboards, from nearbyBohemia and Bavaria, was artificially seasoned at a large plant in Vienna itself, asreported in 1829 by Giacinto Amati: for about 60 hours the planks were subjectedto the action of steam produced by boiling water, so as to remove part of the starchand other substances, and were then dried for two or three days in special ovens.4

Accessories. In 1850-51, in addition to piano makers, the Austrian capital alsonumbered as many as 54 makers of accessories, all rigidly classified per sector(keyboards, cases, legs for cases, steel or iron tuning pins, ivory covers). AtNaples, on the other hand, allied industries meant generic artisans (“bronze mak-ers, blacksmiths, brass workers, string-makers, turners, etc.”).5 For specific acces-sories, Siever’s treatise (1868) lists the addresses of as many as 51 suppliers, allfrom Vienna, Paris, London, or Germany; he himself, owner of one of the bestNeapolitan firms, states that for the action of his «pianoforti inclinati e obliqui»and for their keyboards he bought supplies from Paris (Fig. 1 below).6 The matterof accessories, and even more so of the materials mentioned above, was howevera handicap that weighed on the entire Italian industry for much of the century.

Unlike the harpsichord, the greater structural complexity and rapid develop-ment of the pianoforte made it financially convenient to split the work among

4 Giacinto Amati, Ricerche storico-critiche-scientifiche […], iii, Milano, Pirotta, 1829, p. 258.5 Luigi Nunneri, Relazione sulla condizione della classe operaja pianofortista […], Napoli, Lubra-no, 1887, p. 6 («bronzisti, fabbri, ottonai, cordari, tornieri, ecc.»).6 Giacomo Ferdinando Sievers, Il pianoforte, guida pratica per costruttori, accordatori, dilet-tanti e possessori di pianoforti […], Napoli, Ghio, 1868, pp. 207-211. He adds a fifty-second (CarloCristin, of Naples) who, however, for his more strategically important accessories relied on sup-plies from abroad.

patrizio barbieri

148

7 Alfons Huber,Austria, Piano industry in, in Enc1994, pp. 30-33: 32.8 Pietro Gianelli, Dizionario della musica sacra e profana, 3rd edn, iv, Venezia, Picotti, 1830, p. 46.

specialised sectors. The growing demand from a rapidly developing middle classalso required a rhythm of production unknown to the harpsichord makers ofprevious centuries. Although not aligned with French and English ‘mass produc-tion’, such an excellent organization − leading to low production costs and highproduction quality − rewarded Austria with a high export rate.7

Quality control. In Vienna, a special commission examined the pianos pro-duced by each applicant maker and also ascertained whether he had sufficientfunds to open a workshop with certain quality requirements. Such requirementsmade it possible for Vienna, in the 1870s, to withstand increasing German com-petition. At Naples, this did not occur. Its sectoral market held on so long as highimport taxes protected it from foreign competition, only to collapse when, onbeing annexed to the Kingdom of Italy, the said taxes were abolished (§3.1). Inprevious centuries, this kind of quality control existed in Italy too, carried outmore or less directly by the corporazioni di arti e mestieri, guilds that were abol-ished by the Napoleonic regimes. The result was that, unlike the harpsichord,the Italian piano was not even appreciated in its own country. Indeed, the Vene-tian Pietro Gianelli wrote, in 1830:8

149


circa i piano-forte alcuni veduto un tale stru-mento domandano, dov’è fatto? che se lorosi risponde oltre mar, oltre monte, diconotosto, oh è buono, altrimente neppur sidegnan di ascoltarlo, o ascoltandolo lo dis-prezzano.

as regards the piano-forte, on viewing aninstrument, some ask where it is made. If thereply is ‘from overseas’ or ‘from beyond themountains [Alps]’, they say at once, ‘Oh, thenit’s good’; otherwise they don’t even want tohear it, or if they do, they look down on it.

1.2. Further problems of industrial development. Prior to Unification, Italy wasdivided into many states (§2). Unlike France and Great Britain, they still lackedany kind of modern industrial mentality. Their growth in this sense was largelyimpeded by the following factors:

1. Widespread protectionism, with the sole exception of Piedmont(Turin).2. A political structure opposed to any association of industrialists or workers.

3. Nascent industry opposed both by rich landowners (who saw workers sub-tracted from employment on their large estates) and by those who viewed grow-ing mechanisation as a threat for employment.9

4. Difficulty of attracting the already scarce capital in major credit institutions,owing to the subdivision of Italy into tiny duchies (or rather, ‘duchini microscopici’,as then defined by someone), which prevented the setting up of major factories.10

Since the artisan had to purchase materials from middlemen, the cost of his productwas not competitive when compared to industrial products.11 For piano manufac-turers, considerable funds were needed, for example, to import timber from abroadand leave it to season for several years.12 Only initially was this disadvantage partlyoffset by the still limited transport network, favouring local products.

5. Factories not divided into departments, with little automation and lackingsteam engines. As a result of this kind of organisation, as early as 1807 London’sBroadwood, on the other hand, could produce over 400 pianos per year, withrelated standardisation of quality and containment of running costs.13 In Italythough, Maltarello – the major maker of the period – was still without automaticmachinery in 1870.14 Among the important manufacturers, only Mola wasequipped with a steam engine, and only in the last decade of the century.

6. As far as the piano was concerned, a further obstacle was the kind of actionadopted. Whereas France and England had, right from the start, opted for Stoss-mechanik (striking action, then better known as English or French action) and Vien-

9 Anna Gallo Martucci, Il Conservatorio d’arti e mestieri. Terza classe dell’Accademia delle bellearti di Firenze (1811-1850), Firenze, M.C.S., 1988, p. 70. These latter fears were strengthened by thefact that hydraulic machinery for the throwing and spinning of silk had already left many workersunemployed: Ildebrando Imberciadori, Forze e aspetti industriali della Toscana nel primo ‘800,Firenze, Vallecchi, 1961, p. 53.10 As underlined by the Relazione illustrata della Esposizione campionaria fatta per cura della SocietàPromotrice dell’Industria Nazionale, Torino, Doyen, 1871, p. 187.11 See, for example, Edoardo di Diego, Le arti e le industrie in Lanciano. Studi e considerazioni,Lanciano, Carabba, 1877, pp. 25-26.12 Corinno Mariotti, Istrumenti musicali all’Esposizione di Torino (contin.), «Gazzetta musicaledi Milano», xxiii, 1868, pp. 179-181: 180. Alessandro Betocchi, Forze produttive della provinciadi Napoli, ii, Napoli, De Angelis, 1874, p. 287, mentions – as used by Neapolitan manufacturers –«Russian deal» («abete di Russia») and «American rosewood» («palissandro d’America»).13 Daniel E. Taylor, England, Piano industry in, in Enc1994, pp. 121-124: 121.14 Alberto Errera, Storia e statistica delle industrie venete e accenni al loro avvenire, Venezia,Antonelli, 1870, p. 647.

patrizio barbieri

150

15 Werner Iten, Switzerland, Piano industry in, in Enc1994, pp. 385-386.16 See, for example, the prices of instruments manufactured by Angelo C. Colombo, published inthe «Gazzetta musicale di Milano», xv, 1857, p. 220.17 Esposizione d’industria in Milano, «Gazzetta musicale di Milano», ix, 1851, p. 108 («abbracciatoun sistema, siano tenaci nel perfezionarlo»).18 Mariotti, Istrumenti musicali cit., p. 180 («attitudine stessa dell’operaio italiano, che appunto peril suo ingegno svegliato non comporta di rendersi qual macchina occupato continuamente a fare lastessa parte di un oggetto e di questo poi ignorando del tutto e gli altri dettagli e l’intiero complesso»).19 [De Rensis], Cento anni di Casa Anelli cit., p. 104 («il bisogno, e forse anche la geniale tendenzadegli Italiani non bene disciplinati e troppo artisti, riduceva questi nostri artigiani a spendere in formediverse le loro energie, così che essi erano nello stesso tempo costruttori, suonatori, meccanici»).

na for Prellmechanik (Viennese action), most of the Italian states (together withSwitzerland) adopted both at the same time.15 This was not only for geopolitical rea-sons (Tuscany and Lombardy-Veneto were Austrian prefectures) but also economicones (a piano with Viennese action cost about half the price of the others, a not neg-ligible detail for a still economically weak basin of potential buyers).16 It also led todelay in perfecting the striking action, revealed as the winning system in the secondhalf of the century. This vacillation between choosing the ‘French system’ or the‘Viennese system’ clearly emerges in a recommendation to Milanese makers in 1851,by Casa Ricordi: «having adopted a system, let them persevere in perfecting it».17

7. This last drawback – as noted in 1868 – was aggravated by the «very attitudeof the Italian worker, who, owing to his alert intelligence does not wish to beoccupied, like a machine, in making the same part of an object and wholly ignor-ing the latter’s other details and the object as a whole».18 In 1923 Pietro Anelli tooobserved «that need, and perhaps the congenial tendency of Italians not to bewell-disciplined and to be over-artistic, has reduced our artisans to spendingtheir energies in different ways, so as to be simultaneously makers, players,mechanics» (leading, for example, one of his forebears not only to make pianosand church organs, but also to work as a painter).19

Evolution from the artisan to the semi-industrial stage was launched duringthe Napoleonic era and much accelerated by numerous ‘prize competitions’, aswell as what were real regularly organised ‘exhibitions’, sponsored by variouslocal institutes for industrial development for the very purpose of monitoringand stimulating growth in the different production sectors. Starting from 1861,such exhibitions became nationwide. At international level, the example hadbeen given by London, with the Great Exhibition of 1851.

151


§2. Up to Italian Unification: the semi-industrial phase

Prior to unification, each of the states into which Italy was divided independent-ly developed its own industry. For a clearer view of subsequent developments,they were (in brackets the date of their joining the Kingdom of Italy):

• Kingdom of Piedmont and Sardinia (1861); Savoy and the Department ofMenton-Nice were ceded to France in 1860.

• Kingdom of the Two Sicilies (1861).• Grand-Duchy of Tuscany (1861).• Duchies of Parma, Piacenza and Modena (1861).• Kingdom of Lombardy-Veneto: Lombardy (1861); Veneto (1866); Venezia

Tridentina, Venezia Giulia (1918); Fiume and the Dalmatian territories(1924, assigned however to Jugoslavia in 1945).

• Papal States: Romagna, Marche, Umbria (1861); modern Lazio (1870).We shall now examine in detail the piano production of the various Italian

states during this initial stage.

2.1. Papal States. In Italy, one of the first prize competitions was organised inRome, in 1810, on the Capitol, by Napoleon Bonaparte in person. Prize-winnersinclude Carlo Arnoldi, for a grand piano and for a hydraulically-driven saw, «amachine well-known to mechanics, made in Rome first by him, starting from theyear 1798».20 For most of the nineteenth century, incidentally, Italy’s entire indus-try was kept going by this kind of hydraulic engine. As far as piano-building isconcerned, it may be assumed that such an automatic device was used by Arnoldito saw timber for soundboards and keyboards, a specialisation which, at that time,was already a separate industrial branch in other countries (being fairly wide-spread, for example, in Bavaria, a region close to Arnoldi’s native Trentino).21

With the Pope’s return however (1814), in Rome – the only case among allItalian cities – such initiatives had no follow-up.22 In 1838, it was remarked

20 Processo verbale del concorso ai premj de’ prodotti delle arti, e delle manifatture di necessità, di como-do, e di lusso de’ romani dipartimenti in occasione del giorno onomastico di Napoleone I […], Roma,Perego Salvioni, 1810, pp. 7-8.21 On Bavarian workshops, see Sievers, Il pianoforte cit., pp. 207-211.22 Philippe Camille [compte de] Tournon, Études statistiques sur Rome et la partie occiden-tale des Étas Romains […], Paris, Treuttel et Würz, 1831, Livre iii, p. 13.

patrizio barbieri

152

23 Giovanni Bowring, Statistica della Toscana, di Lucca, degli Stati pontifici e Lombardo-Veneti especialmente delle loro relazioni commerciali. Rapporto, London, Clowes, 1838, p. 80.24 Indeed, the name of Carlo Arnoldi is included amongst the tuners: L’indicatore ossia raccoltad’indirizzi e notizie risguardanti gli oggetti di maggior interesse ed utilità ad ogni ceto di persone […],Roma, Ajani, 1842, pp. 222, 224.25 Patrizio Barbieri, Pianos and piano-makers in Rome, 1708-1900, article under preparation.26 Alessandroni’s activity however starts being recorded shortly after 1850, when he producedseveral accurate copies of the Erard grand; in 1856 he made Fr. Luigi Taparelli d’Azeglio’s «Vio-licembalo», much applauded by Franz Liszt: Patrizio Barbieri, Violicembalos and other ItalianSostenente pianos 1785-1900, «Galpin Society Journal», lxii, 2009, pp. 117-139: 125-130.27 Giovanni Carano Donvito, Le manifatture del Reame nella esposizione del 1830 in Napoli, inStudi in onore di Gino Luzzatto, iii, Milano, Giuffrè, 1950, pp. 34-41: 35; Paologiovanni Maione-Francesca Seller, Prime ricognizioni archivistiche sui costruttori di pianoforti a Napoli nell’Otto-cento, in Liuteria musica e cultura 1997, a c. di Renato Meucci, Lucca, LIM, 1998, pp. 21-41: 21-22.

that «many towns in England with 30,000 inhabitants produce a greaterquantity of manufactures than the 3,000,000 subjects of the Papal States», afact due to the ‘protections’ and ‘prohibitions’ of Papal government.23 As lateas 1842, Carlo Arnoldi − eight of whose instruments have come down to us −was still the only official maker of pianos in the Eternal City, although at thatperiod his activity must still have been that of an artisan, or even an ordinarytuner.24 Research has shown that at that time, the great popularity of Vien-nese pianos had reduced piano-building activities to almost nil. Documenta-tion concerning his death (in Rome, on 28 August 1854) also shows that evenCarlo Arnoldi had transformed his activity and become a picture dealer, total-ly abandoning his previous trade.25 After him, in Rome, the first major pianomaker is found only after annexation to the Kingdom of Italy (Paolo Alessan-droni: see Table 6 below).26 With the latter, Rome’s timid adventure into thesector closes definitively.

2.2. Naples. In the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies, the start of industrial activi-ties was also launched during the Napoleonic era. In 1800, a «Giunta di arti emanifatture» was set up, subsequently becoming the «Giunta di arti, manifat-ture e industria» (1808), which, in 1821, was merged with the «Reale Istituto d’in-coraggiamento delle scienze naturali».27 The vigorous stimulation produced bythis institute was also continued under Ferdinand ii, who succeeded to thethrone in 1830. During this period, many foreign entrepreneurs – including sev-eral piano makers – settled in Naples, attracted by stable political conditions, a

153


promising market and, more especially, by high protectionist tariffs (averaging10-12%, with peaks of 20% for the flourishing iron and steel industry).28

The initial activity in Naples – early on in the century – of the Viennese CarlFischer notwithstanding,29 most piano makers soon opted for the Frech-typeStossmechanik, often introducing personal variants (Fig. 1). The Istituto d’inco-raggiamento also took a systematic interest in piano building and, at two of thefirst industrial exhibitions it sponsored (1825, 1828), a prize was won by Carlo DeMeglio; this maker may be considered the father of the Neapolitan piano, as wellas head of the family that in Italy – throughout the century – was distinguishedfor its production of grand pianos (see, below, Table 6).

28 Angelo Mangone,L’industria nel Regno di Napoli 1859-1860, Napoli, Fiorentino, 1976, pp. 24-25.29 Dolge, Pianos and their makers cit., p. 216.

patrizio barbieri

154

Fig. 1. From the catalogue of the Sievers factory, Naples (1868): No. 5, baby grand («mezzacoda» with «French action»); No. 6, concert grand («di academia», «costruzione alla francese»

still not of the overstrung type, five iron reinforcing bars over the strings); No. 9, «pianoforte inclinato a corde oblique»

30 Mangone, L’industria nel Regno di Napoli cit., p. 81.31 Nunneri, Relazione cit., p. 4; Michele Ruta, Storia critica delle condizioni della musica in Italia edel conservatorio di S. Pietro a Majella di Napoli, Napoli, De Angelis, 1877, p. 186; Seller, I pianofortinapoletani nel XIX secolo cit., p. 177. At Naples, musical instrument artisans must have largely focused onpiano production. Commenting on the exhibition held at Naples in 1853, the «Gazzetta musicale diMilano», xii, 1854, p. 54, observed: «If we should judge from the kind of instruments presented by theprize-winning manufacturers, we would say that piano manufacture alone is active and numerous inthat capital» («Se dobbiamo arguire dalla specie degli strumenti presentati dai fabbricatori premiati,convien dire che la sola fabbricazione dei pianoforti sia attiva ed anche numerosa in quella capitale»).32 Ruta, Storia critica cit., p. 187.33 Massimo Petrocchi, Le industrie del Regno di Napoli dal 1850 al 1860, Napoli, Pironti, 1955,pp. 14-15.34 Charles Timbrell, Pleyel, Ignace-Joseph (et C.ie), in Enc1994, pp. 296-297: 297.35 Huber, Austria cit., pp. 32-33.36 R. L., De’ saggi delle manifatture napolitane esposte nella solenne mostra del 1836, «Annali civili delRegno delle Due Sicilie», xi, maggio-agosto 1836, pp. 55-93: 81 («rimangono ancora tai musicalistrumenti di Napoli a gran distanza da quei di Germania, di Francia e d’Inghilterra»).

Towards 1850, in the Kingdom of Naples, the musical instrument industryemployed about 1500 persons overall.30 The most developed was the piano sec-tor, numbering 70 makers in 1860, of whom 42 of a certain size.31 Among theleaders, Giacomo Ferdinando Sievers employed 30 workmen.32 Although quan-titative data is not available, it can be deduced that most makers still had work-shops at an artisan level, with a restricted number of employees, the manageralso covering the role of «capo d’arte», with a turnover mostly «to order».33

Such a high number of manufacturers in a single city is not however surprising. InParis, in 1847, there were as many as 180, some of which of a considerable size (suchas, for example, Erard and Pleyel, each of which had already reached a serial numberof 36,000 by about the year 1865).34 A more suitable comparison is with Vienna,where even the most famous firms – such as Bösendorfer or Streicher – remained bypreference at a semi-artisan level. In 1850-51 the Austrian capital numbered 105 mak-ers with an overall turnover of 2600 pianos per year (whereas, at the same period,Broadwood alone produced 2300 annually).35 Between Naples and Vienna howeverthere was the substantial difference already noted in §1.1. As a consequence, Neapoli-tan production, at least around 1835-45, was not competitive. Indeed:

1. With regard to the pianos presented at the 1836 exhibition, an inspiredcriticism by the Istituto d’incoraggiamento noted «that these Neapolitan musi-cal instruments remain far behind those of Germany, France and England».36

155


2. For those (all Neapolitan) presented at the 1844 exhibition, prizes werelimited to the silver medal, especially as a result of their higher prices.37

Protected by high tariffs, Neapolitan production was moreover almost exclu-sively limited to the domestic market: indeed, the Parthenopean maker LuigiNunneri states that, in his city, prior to the unification of Italy, «the appearanceof a piano at the customs was an event, a rarity».38 Just as rare, however, wereexports, as shown in Tables 1a-b and, below, Table 2.39 The details provided bythe latter are borne out by the evidence of Ponsicchi.40 However that may be, atthe London exhibition in 1862 the only four Italian piano exhibitors came fromthe Kingdom of Naples, and among them one was an award-winner, albeit with amere «honourable mention»: Leopoldo De Meglio.41

37 G. F., De’ saggi delle manifatture napoletane nell’anno 1844, «Annali civili del Regno delle DueSicilie», xxxvi, ottobre-dicembre 1844, pp. 117-152: 136.38 Nunneri, Relazione cit., p. 6 («il comparire di un pianoforte in dogana era un caso, una rar-ità»).39 The data in Tables 1a-b are taken from: Ministero delle Finanze. Movimento commerciale delleprovincie napoletane nell’anno 1859. Appendice al movimento commerciale delle provincie dell’Italia set-tentrionale, in Ministero delle finanze. Movimento commerciale delle provincie toscane negli anni 1859 e1860. Appendice al movimento commerciale delle provincie dell’Italia settentrionale, Torino, Stamperiareale, 1863, p. 85 et seq: 101, 112-3, 175, 186, 236.40 Cesare Ponsicchi, Il pianoforte sua origine e sviluppo […], Firenze, Guidi, 1876, p. 56 («NelNapoletano abbiamo distinte fabbriche che però hanno poca esportazione»).41 Table 6 and the International Exhibition 1862. Official catalogue. Industrial Department, London,Truscott & Simmons, [1862], pp. 325-326.

patrizio barbieri

156

Period 1840-45 1845-49 1850-59 1859 1860

N° pianos 44(average)

48(average)

47(average)

36 15

Table 1a. Kingdom of Naples, continental provinces: number of pianos imported per year, from1840 to 1860. Unlike other goods, the state registers contain no records of pianos exported,

showing that the quantity was negligible

157


STATE YEAR / IMPORT

1859 1860

Austria 2,550 1,800

Francia 41,438 2,700

Stati Sardi [= Piedmont] 2,550

TOTAL 46,538 4,500

Imp. duty, gross (total) 7,714 715

Imp. duty, net (total) 6,942 636

Table 1b. Kingdom of Naples, continental provinces: value of piano imports and related customs dues, in liras, years 1859-60. The names of the single states are the original ones

Fig. 2. The solemn industrial exhibition of 1853, organised by the Reale Istituto d’incoraggia-mento delle scienze naturali, in the Sala di Tarsia, at Naples. From E. ORESTE MASTROJANNI, Il

Reale Istituto d’incoraggiamento di Napoli. MDCCCVI-MCMVI […], Napoli, Pierro, 1907

Bearing witness to the city’s technological pre-eminence in Italian produc-tion in that sector, it should be remembered that it was at Naples that for the firsttime in the Peninsula a piano with an entirely metal bearing structure wasdesigned and built. Indeed, 5 August 1838 saw the granting of a five-year ‘privati-va’ (patent) to Giacomo Ferdinando Sievers «for the construction and sale ofpianos with cast-iron frame and case».42 At the Neapolitan exhibition held thatyear, Sievers was awarded the «small gold medal» for an instrument that wasstrikingly similar to the one described on the said patent and to another present-ed in the same year, but its frame was actually merely reinforced with «ironbars».43 At the Neapolitan industrial exhibition in 1853 (Fig. 1), however, Gio-vanni Maurer presented a «pianoforte with a new invention, that is with a cast-iron frame and wrest plank» (as we shall see below, in the same year a similarattempt was made at Milan, but limited to just the frame).44 The iron wrest plank

42 Tornate dell’Istituto d’incoraggiamento (settembre 1839), «Annali civili del Regno delle DueSicilie», xxi, settembre-dicembre 1839, p. 135 («per la costruzione e smaltimento di pianoforticon pancone e cassa di ferro fuso»). Archive documents published by Maione and Seller, Primericognizioni cit., p. 28, show that a few months later (October 12), Sievers applied for and obtainedanother patent for a pianoforte with the same frame, but with hammers striking the strings fromabove, downward toward the soundboard (the already-known ‘down-strike action’). A pianofortewith English action and with the same hammer action was later presented at the 1844 exhibitionby Giovanni Schmid and Giacomo Eppler: G. F., De’ saggi delle manifatture napoletane nell’anno1844, p. 136 (piano with «spina e bischeri situati al di sotto del pancone; poiché il martello batten-do la corda in senso opposto, la rende più salda, e la voce fassi più armoniosa e chiara»).43 R. L., De’ saggi delle manifatture napoletane esposti nella solenne mostra del 1838, «Annali civili delRegno delle Due Sicilie», xix, gennaio-aprile 1839, pp. 74-75; R. L., Rimunerazioni delle manifatturenapoletane per l’anno 1838, id., xx, maggio-agosto 1839, pp. 45-47: the said instrument had ‘inversestriking’, an action invented by Count Stanhope, subsequently taken up by Pape (Paris) and final-ly perfected by Sievers (i.e. the ‘down-strike action’ encountered in note 42).44 Disamina eseguita dal Reale Istituto d’incoraggiamento degli strumenti musicali, «Gazzetta musicale diNapoli», iii, 1854, pp. 9-11: 10 («pianoforte con una nuova invenzione, cioè con telaio e pancone diferro»), which states: «This construction is highly useful because not only does it influence the dura-tion of the tuning, but also helps preserve the case itself, since the stress produced by the strings hasno contact with wood, but with iron» («Tale costruzione è utilissima perché influisce alla durata del-l’accordo non solo, ma anche alla conservazione del mobile, non avendo la forza prodotta dalle cordealcuna relazione col legno, ma bensì col ferro»). Up to then, manufacturers such as Carlo De Meglioand Sievers had merely reinforced the structure with «long iron bars»: Cronaca Napolitana, «Gazzettamusicale di Napoli», i, 1852, p. 11. Fig. 1 is taken from E. Oreste Mastrojanni, Il Reale Istituto d’in-coraggiamento di Napoli. mdcccvi-mcmvi […], Napoli, Pierro, 1907, p. 59.

patrizio barbieri

158

45 Maione-Seller, Prime ricognizioni archivistiche cit., p. 26 (from which moreover we learnthat even prior to 1852 Maurer had been granted a patent for the said invention).46 Mary Ellen Haupert, Frame, in Enc1994, pp. 137-139: 139; Taylor, England cit., p. 121;Huber, Austria cit., p. 33 (according to the last-mentioned author, in Vienna the first cast-ironframe was employed in 1862, by Friedrich Ehrbar). The «Gazzetta musicale di Milano», xvi, 1858,p. 201, however, records that, at an exhibition held at Florence, the «German» instrumentsincluded «one pianoforte by Besendorf, one by Tomascheck, one by Seuffert, and one by Betsy.This last instrument is very solid owing to its cast-iron wrest plank» («un pianoforte diBesendorf, uno di Tomascheck, uno di Seuffert, ed uno di Betsy. Il quale ultimo istrumento è dimolta solidità per avere un pancone di ferro fuso»).47 Sievers, Il pianoforte cit., p. 83.

was provided with a groove holding the timber to which the tuning pins werefixed.45 Such a construction had the advantage of isolating the weak woodenstructure from the stress of the strings, then continually increasing (most of thefairly thick wooden frames of the pianoforti a tavolo (Tafelklaviers = table orsquare pianos), subjected over many years to diagonal string traction, even todaypresent permanent torsional deformation, often problematic to deal with duringrestoration). Around 1850 all-iron frames were widespread in the United States,but in Europe popularity was slower in coming, owing to the belief that an entire-ly wooden construction – wood being ‘resonant’ par excellence – was decisive forthe proper acoustics of the instrument. In Vienna, for example, the first frames ofthis kind appeared as late as 1858-62.46 Even at the mentioned 1853 exhibition,Maurer’s innovation was not duly assessed, since he received only one of the foursilver medals, as compared to the seven gold medals awarded to traditional pianosby other makers in the city. In 1868, Sievers himself condemned47

159


un sopraccarico di ferro che guasta in certomodo l’omogeneità del legname che ajuta larapida trasmissione del suono; perciò lamaggior parte dei fabbricanti hanno dismes-so interamente il ferro fuso, e non adopera-no che ferro battuto [«a forza di martello»,he specified shortly afterwards], scemandoil numero delle sbarre, le quali solo pei gran-di pianoforti giungono a 5 e non oltrepassa-no questo numero che rare volte.

an overload of iron, which somehow ruinsthe homogeneity of the timber that assistsrapid sound transmission. For this reason,most manufacturers have entirely dis-missed cast iron and only employ wroughtiron [«by dint of the hammer», he speci-fied shortly afterwards], decreasing thenumber of rods to the number of only fivein grand pianos and only rarely exceedingthis number.

Even an authoritative specialist from the «Gazzetta musicale di Milano», as lateas 1881, declared that he preferred «worked iron [= wrought iron] to cast iron»because «cast iron lacks sonority».48

The city of Naples supplied almost all the provinces lying «al di qua del Faro»,i.e. in the continental part of the kingdom. As we shall see, trade also extended toSicily, although recent research has revealed the presence of a surprisingly highnumber of local makers in the provinces «al di là del Faro».49

2.3. Florence. After the Medici dynasty died out in 1737, Tuscany passed on toa branch of the Hapsburg-Lorraine family, becoming a prefecture of the Viennagovernment. As a result, pianos too started to be imported from Austria (andthese instruments immediately won the Tuscans’ favour, since even the veryfirst – unlike those of local production – already had a highly French-polishedcase).50 This meant that promising workshops like those of Cristofori and Fer-rini did not give rise to a real Tuscan school, but merely left a tail-end consistingof a few isolated artisans.

The situation gave signs of improving under the Napoleonic administration,although the latter clearly sought to safeguard its own national industry.51 In 1809the administration created in Florence a «Conservatorio di arti e mestieri», like theone in Paris (founded in 1794 and still active today), in order to contribute to thetechnological improvement of the Grand Duchy’s manufactures. This institutionwas weakened considerably by the departure of the French and not until 1839 did itproduce any public exhibitions, toward which local industry reacted much moretepidly than at Naples. In particular, the making of musical instruments receivedno stimulus from the Conservatory’s plentiful battery of acoustic instruments.52

48 Gustavo Chouquet, La musica all’Esposizione di Parigi (cont.), «Gazzetta musicale diMilano», xxxvi, 1881, pp. 59-61: 61.49 Giovanni Paolo Di Stefano, Makers of the piano in Sicily between the eighteenth and the twen-tieth century, in The piano in Italy, ed. by Giovanni Paolo Di Stefano, Palermo, Undamaris, in print.50 Ponsicchi, Il pianoforte cit., p. 37.51 Gallo Martucci, Il Conservatorio d’arti e mestieri cit., p. 37; Rodolfo Morandi, Storiadella grande industria in Italia, Bari, Laterza, 1931, pp. 7-31.52 On this subject, see Guido Gori, L’Accademia delle Belle Arti e l’Istituto Tecnico Toscano 1809-1859, in L’acustica e i suoi strumenti. La collezione dell’Istituto Tecnico Toscano, a c. di Anna Giatti eMara Miniati, Firenze, Giunti, 2001, pp. 11-30 (Italian-English bilingual edn).

patrizio barbieri

160

53 Ponsicchi, Il pianoforte cit., p. 57.54 La Casa musicale G. Ceccherini & C. Successori Ducci 1831-1981. Cronaca di avvenimenti musicali,Firenze, Tipografia Giuntina, 1981, pp. 3-6; Esposizione dei prodotti dell’industria manifatturiera inToscana, «Gazzetta musicale di Milano», iii, 1844, pp. 174-175. 55 Luigi Ferdinando Casamorata, Esposizione di arti e manifatture in Firenze, «Gazzetta musi-cale di Milano», vi, 1847, pp. 330-331 («i suoi strumenti, quantunque di voce assai cupa, non man-cano al certo di pregio, e potrebbero aver voga in commercio se i prezzi fossero più miti»). Con-cerning the statements on the double escapement, see however L’esposizione italiana del 1881 inMilano illustrata, Milano, Sonzogno, [1881], p. 154.

The first pianos made in Florence on a semi-industrial scale were producedwell into the nineteenth century by the firm Lucherini, whose factory was man-aged by a German technician. German too was the trade-mark with which theseinstruments, provided with Viennese action, were placed on the market.53 1830-31 saw the opening of the factory of the brothers Antonio and MichelangeloDucci, which – beside organs – produced pianos almost identical to those of theAustrian Carl Stein, the maker at whose workshop Michelangelo had improvedhis knowledge; at the city’s 1841 exhibition, the two brothers also presented anew hydraulic veneering machine.54 By 1847, however, Tuscany’s already weaksectoral industry was practically extinct: Lucherini and the Duccis had haltedpiano production because it was not economically profitable. The only survivingmaker in that year was Berlians – perhaps the first, together with the above-men-tioned Paolo Alessandroni, to introduce Erard’s double escapement in Italy –,who produced pianos with French action. Luigi F. Casamorata, to whom we owethis information, adds however: «his instruments, albeit with a fairly darksound, were certainly not lacking in esteem, and might have been successfulcommercially if their prices had been lower».55 This remark, besides emphasis-ing that production by minor manufacturers was no longer commercially com-petitive, reveals that the Florentines were still tied to the clear timbre producedby Prellmechanik, which even Vienna at this period was seeking in every way torender more sonorous. In Florence, the Viennese piano tradition was so rootedthat Cesare Ponsicchi – tuner at the local music conservatory, directed by thealready-mentioned Casamorata – in 1876 reports that up to a few years earlier«some teachers had religiously retained their method of touch with which theyeven played modern pianos»: this method – abounding in «rifioriture e picchiet-tature», and with a very light touch – had been needed by the «very harsh» and

161


56 Ponsicchi, Il pianoforte cit., p. 38 («taluni maestri i quali avevano conservato religiosamentela loro maniera di tocco col quale suonavano anche i moderni pianoforti»).57 The data in Table 1c is taken from Ministero delle Finanze. Movimento commerciale delle provincietoscane negli anni 1859 e 1860 cit., Torino, Stamperia reale, 1863, pp. 46, 82.58 Il commercio estero del Regno Lombardo-Veneto dal 1815 al 1865, a c. di Ira A. Glazier, Roma,Archivio economico dell’Unificazione Italiana, 1966, p. 46.59 Giuseppe Sacchi,Ragguaglio intorno alla pubblica esposizione degli oggetti d’industria in Lombar-dia nell’anno 1830, «Annali universali di statistica», xxvi, ottobre-dicembre 1830, pp. 91-112: 100.

patrizio barbieri

162

dry sound produced by the highly sensitive Viennese action (whose hammershad to be covered with leather, rather than felt).56

Tables 1c and 2 however show that in pre-unification Tuscany piano exportswere irrelevant as compared to imports (the latter favoured moreover by a lowtariff of 4.4%, as shown in Table 1c).57

MOVEMENT YEAR

1859 1860

Imported (N°) 78 96

Imported (value, in Liras) - 52,829

Import duty (Liras) - 2,313

Exported (N°) 3 6

Exported (value, in Liras) - 3,600

Export duty - -

Table 1c. Grand Duchy of Tuscany: trade exchanges with other countries for «square, grand,and upright pianos» («pianoforti a tavola, a coda e verticali»), years 1859-60. For 1859 it is even

stated that, out of 68 instruments of the 78 imported, 20 were square (“a tavolino”), 43 grands, 5 harmoniums (“armoniche a tavolino”)

2.4. Lombardy-Veneto and Parma. In Lombardy-Veneto, as in Tuscany, the protec-tionist policy of the Austrian monarchy imposed grave restrictions on industrialdevelopment.58 Commenting on the fact that no pianoforte was included in theMilanese 1830 exhibition, the sociologist Giuseppe Sacchi provided the follow-ing explanation:59

60 Rivista, «Gazzetta musicale di Milano», xiii, 1855, pp. 213-214.61 I. Cambiasi, Esposizione degli oggetti d’arte e manifatture in Brera, «Gazzetta musicale diMilano», vi, 1847, pp. 185-7 («di nuova costruzione, colla cassa intelajata di ferro»).

Despite this fact, in Lombardy the piano industry developed better than in Tus-cany. In Milan, it was officially launched by Giuseppe Cattaneo: thanks to a goldmedal awarded in 1834, owing to the interest of the local «Regio Istituto di scien-ze», he managed to obtain from a «capitalist» (capitalista) – perhaps the first caseof this kind in this sector – the necessary funding to transform his workshop intoa small but modern factory. Cattaneo however died shortly afterwards, leavingas his successor his pupil Ambrogio Riva who, in partnership with a certainMichele Voetter, in 1840-47 produced an average of one piano per week (about300 were produced over the first six years). In that same period, two other pupilsof Cattaneo, Angelo Colombo and Luigi Stucchi, went to France to improve theirknowledge (the former with Boisselot, the latter with Erard); on their return,they were able to open, each on his own account, a factory like the Riva establish-ment (also obtaining major official awards at the Brera exhibition of 1851).Immediately afterwards, Stucchi «devoted himself entirely» to making uprightpianos, whereas Colombo also produced grands.60

The two immediately faced the problem of introducing iron to reinforce theframe. Earlier at the Milanese exhibition in 1847 Riva had presented a pianoforte«of new construction, with the case framed with iron», which, however, raisedno reaction.61 Five years later, Colombo too started introducing what weredefined as «dangerous novelties» to the art: indeed, at the 1853 competition, hewas present «with a grand piano framed externally and on three sides with largeparallelepipedal iron bars», with one end of the strings fixed to the said bars andthe other to the tuning pins fixed in the wooden wrest-plank. This time there wasplenty of reaction. In an article dated 1855 it was observed that, although the tun-ing lasted longer, it was to the detriment of the sonority, since «the sound board,together with its frame, was by the same maker condemned to the irons!» [i.e. to

163


Nessun gravicembalo fu recato all’espo-sizione. La fabbrica di tali strumenti cheun tempo fioriva anche fra noi è stata sob-barcata dalla concorrenza de’ gravicembaliviennesi.

No gravicembalo [= piano] was shown atthe exhibition. The making of such instru-ments, which once also flourished in ourmidst, has lost credit owing to the compe-tition of Viennese pianos.

hard labour] («la tavola armonica in un colla sua incassatura venne dallo stessoartefice condannata ai ferri!»). For which reason, «signor Colombo was morti-fied at being deferred to another competition, with suspended decision». At the1855 exhibition, the tenacious piano-maker presented a modified frame, in whichthe soundboard only came into contact with the iron «at a few points».62

Although a similar acoustic analysis appears decidedly naïf nowadays, thesame cannot be said of a remark added by the anonymous critic of the «Gazzettamusicale di Milano» to his said article dated 1855, admitting the improved butstill unsatisfactory sonority of Colombo’s second attempt. Indeed, he focused onthe contribution that the resonance vibrations of the ‘dead’ part of the string, i.e.the part between the bridge and the hitch pin, would have had in making the tim-bre clearer in the top notes. He was clearly proposing the same ‘duplex scaling’that was later patented and used for the first time practically on Theodore Stein-way’s top register in 1872 (and which, in modern times, Fazioli has extended toboth ends of the string).63 The following is the related passage, whose impor-tance has not been realised till now:64

62 Rivista, «Gazzetta musicale di Milano», xiii, 1855, pp. 213-4: 214 («internandola [the frame], eimbrigliando la tavola armonica in guisa di farle perdere molto meno della sua risonanza, cioèmettendola in pochi punti a contatto col ferro»).63 On Steinway: Philip Jamison iii, Duplex scaling, in Enc1994, p. 114; Edward E. Swenson,Aliquot scaling, in Enc1994, p. 24. Patrizio Barbieri, Fazioli, Paolo, in The New Grove Dictionary ofMusic and Musicians, London, Macmillan, 2001, viii, p. 632. Prior to 1881 the ‘duplex scala’ hadalso been adopted by Erard and Pleyel: Chouquet, La musica all’esposizione di Parigi cit., p. 44.64 Rivista, «Gazzetta musicale di Milano», xiii, 1855, p. 214.

patrizio barbieri

164

Del resto noi siamo d’avviso che sul carat-tere delle voci e sulla sonorità dell’istru-mento molto influisca anche la posizionedell’archetto [= the bridge on the sound-board] che determina la lunghezza diquella porzione di corda che oscilla perl’urto immediato del martello. Ora trovi-amo che nell’ultimo strumento è troppobreve la parte vibrante delle corde (agliacuti) e che l’archetto inoltre poggia trop-po vicino al punto di attacco di dettecorde.

At the same time, we are of the opinion thatthe character of the sound and sonority ofthe instrument is also greatly affected bythe position of the bridge [on the sound-board] that determines the length of thatportion of the string that vibrates under theimmediate strike action of the hammer.Now we find that in the last instrument,the vibrating part of the string is too short(in the top notes) and that the bridge alsorests too close to the point at which thestrings are fixed.

Not only was Colombo endowed with technological entrepreneurship, but alsowith an industrial mentality. Indeed, the awards made by the Regio Istituto diScienze to the exhibitors also took into account, as did all similar institutions atthat time, the latters’ competitive aspect in the purely commercial sector. In 1853«wealthy citizens» in Milan had offered to finance the setting up of a «grandiosenational factory», proposing the merger into a single company of the workshopsof Stucchi and Colombo. These two, however, jealous of their individual enter-

165


È legge di acustica che quando una cordasi divide in due parti aliquote, e si fa vibra-re una di esse per urto diretto, l’altra pur sicommuove spontaneamente e vibra pro-ducendo un suono correlativo alla sua lun-ghezza. Laonde se l’archetto, su cui pog-giano le corde, fosse disposto in modo chela loro lunghezza totale (negli acuti)restasse divisa in parti eguali, e successi-vamente, andando verso il grave in partisempre più piccole nel rapporto di 1 a 2, di1 a 3, di 1 a 4, la distanza fra l’archetto e lespine, ossia la lunghezza della corda cre-duta morta, essendo massima agli acuti,minima ai gravi relativamente alle lun-ghezze totali, avremmo per le voci acuteconcomitante l’unisono: e successiva-mente gli altri suoni saranno accompa-gnati dall’ottava, dall’ottava della quinta,dalla doppia ottava. Noi crediamo chequesta concomitanza di suoni armonici,comunque deboli per rapporto al suonoprincipale, concorra a produrre la purezzadelle voci acute, la morbidezza delle vocimedie e la rotondità delle gravi: e che ladeficienza di detti suoni pei mancati rap-porti di distanza dell’archetto conduca ainotati difetti; dei quali trovasi liberato ilpianoforte d’abete [another instrumentpresented by Colombo, without an ironframe], avendo l’archetto stabilito prossi-mamente secondo le distanze voluteappunto dai succitati rapporti.

According to the laws of acoustics, when astring is divided into two aliquot parts, andone part is made to vibrate by direct strik-ing action, the other also moves sponta-neously and vibrates, producing a soundcorresponding to its length. Thus, if thebridge, on which the strings rest, wereplaced so that their total length (in the topnotes) were divided into equal parts andsubsequently proceeds towards the lownotes in increasingly smaller parts with aratio of 1:2, 1:3, 1:4, the distance betweenthe bridge and the hitch pins, i.e. the lengthof string deemed ‘dead’, being maximumin the top notes and minimal in the lownotes as compared to the total lengths,would produce a doubling of the top notesin unison. Subsequently, the other noteswould be accompanied by the octave, bythe octave of the fifth, and by the doubleoctave. We deem that this concomitance ofharmonic sounds, albeit weak as comparedto the main sound, contribute in producingthe purity of the top notes, the softness ofthe middle notes, and the fullness of thelow notes. We also deem that defectivesounds due to the improper ratio of the dis-tance of the bridge leads to the defectsnoted; from which we find the fir-treepiano entirely free [another instrumentpresented by Colombo, without an ironframe], since the bridge is placed accordingto the distances required by the said ratios.

prise, refused to merge. Despite this, from 1855 onwards, leadership in theMilanese industry was decidedly taken by Colombo, who (1) went into partner-ship with Giuseppe Camploy, a wealthy piano dealer from Venice, who had alsoinvented a paint that made the soundboards highly resonant («assaissimo riso-nanti»), and (2) moved the carpentry section of the factory to Vimercate, wherelabour was cheaper. Thus, between 1855 and 1857 he managed to double his num-ber of workers (bringing them up to a total of 40, split between the two depart-ments of Milan and Vimercate), producing, in the same period, about 150 pianosat competitive prices (some with the ‘French system’, others – much cheaper –with the ‘Viennese system’).65 Never weary of experiments, in 1859 he was alsoamong the first to develop the cross-strung model, of which he was erroneouslyconsidered the inventor:66 in this §2.4 we have just seen that Colombo did nothowever imagine the decisive importance that, together with the single ironframe, this innovation would have assumed in the short term.

Among the Italian provinces still under Austrian influence, others gave rise totheir own industries. At Parma, capital of the duchy of the same name, by way ofexample, the factory belonging to the Berzioli brothers was long active, foundedin 1836. In 1861, these manufacturers – remembered as the first, together with thePaduan Gregorio Trentin, to introduce the industry to northern Italy – wereundergoing a slump, with a turnover of just four pianos per year, produced by atotal of six workers (two foremen, two carpenters and two boys).67

At Padua, the town where the above-mentioned Trentin had done his pio-neering work, in about 1830 Nicolò Lachin set up his workshop. Two decadeslater, the famous pianist Sigismund Thalberg publicly expressed such a positiveopinion of his instruments, both those with the Viennese system and those withPleyel-type action, that the number of factory hands had to be tripled to tackle

65 Rivista, «Gazzetta musicale di Milano», xiii, 1855, pp. 213-214; Rivista, «Gazzetta musicale diMilano», xv, 1857, pp. 219-221.66 Salvatore Farina, La musica all’esposizione industriale milanese, «Gazzetta musicale diMilano», XXVI, 1871, pp. 325-328: 326-327.67 Statistica del Regno d’Italia. Industria. Industrie manuali della provincia di Parma, anno 1861, Firen-ze, Tofani, 1865, p. xxxvii. This kind of data must however be viewed with caution, since eventhen manufacturers’ tax returns were not always accurate.

patrizio barbieri

166

68 Cesare Trombini, Fabbricazione di strumenti musicali nel Veneto. Nicolò Lachin e AntonioPedrinelli, «Gazzetta musicale di Milano», xii, 1854, pp. 116-7; Errera, Storia e statistica delleindustrie venete cit., pp. 648-649.69 These statistics are taken from Ministero delle Finanze. Movimento commerciale delle provincie del-l’Italia settentrionale, e dell’Emilia nel 1860, Torino, Stamperia reale, 1863, pp. ix (which notifiesthat Nice and Savoy are not included, having just been ceded to France), 100, 225. An earlier publi-cation (Ministero delle Finanze. Movimento commerciale delle provincie dell’Italia settentrionale nel1859 […], Torino, Stamperia reale, 1862, pp. ix, 92, 208) gives data only for the «Antiche provin-cie», i.e. the Kingdom of Piedmont and Sardinia (published in Table 2, year 1859): for Lombardythe only one given is for musical instruments overall, without separating those only for pianos.70 G[iuseppe] S[acchi], Prima esposizione pubblica de’ prodotti dell’industria piemontese, «Annaliuniversali di statistica», xxiii, Jan.-March 1830, pp. 223-224: 223.

the sudden increase in demand.68 Unlike France, in Italy cases of this kind werealmost unique. Lachin did not however take advantage of the occasion to becomea major producer at national level. We shall see, on the other hand, what hap-pened to Vincenzo Maltarello, whose factory – set up at Rovigo in 1852 – becamehighly important starting from 1859, in which year it was moved to Vicenza.

Unlike other Italian states, the foreign trade statistics for Lombardy-Venetofor the years 1859-60 were not published, and were mostly kept in the Austrianarchives. We have, however, the data summary given in Table 1d.69

167


Algeria Austria Francia Inghilt. Russia S. Pontif. Svizzera Vari Total

1-

101-

454-

5-

-6

2-

56

2-

57012

Table 1d. States of «Northern Italy» (limited to: Piedmont, Liguria, Sardinia, Lombardy, Emilia-Romagna): imports (above) and exports (below) of «square, grand, and upright

pianos» («pianoforti a tavola, a coda e verticali»), year 1860. The names of the single states are the original ones

2.5. Turin. The first public exhibition in this city took place in 1829.70 At sub-sequent ones, only a few sporadic artisans won any award, such as Luigi Alovisioand the Viennese Francesco Weiss (at Turin), Carlo Panizza (at Alessandria),Domenico Gregori (in the Department of Nice). Around 1850, Turin numbered

only two semi-artisanal factories for «cembali o pianoforti da tavolo».71 How-ever, albeit the last to arrive, in twenty short years the city became the greatestItalian manufacturer of pianos (mostly uprights). This transformation wastriggered by Giacinto Aymonino, who set up his factory in 1850, bringing qual-ified technicians from Paris.72 Following his example, 1850-52 – always at Turin– saw the opening of the factories of the Berliner Carlo Roeseler, of GiovanniBattista Berra and of Felice Chiappo. As a result, at the 1858 exhibition the fol-lowing statement was made:73

71 Relazione illustrata della Esposizione campionaria, p. 187. In actual fact – from recent research –their number was found to be slightly higher, albeit always limited to just a few pieces.72 As for example Lorenzo Deschaux (égaliseur of Herz), Relazioni dei giurati e giudizio della R.Camera di agricoltura e commercio della Esposizione nazionale di prodotti delle industrie seguita nel 1858in Torino, p. 290.73 Relazioni dei giurati cit., p. 284.

patrizio barbieri

168

Negli anni addietro avevamo bensì arteficiabilissimi, capaci di eseguire eccellentistrumenti, ma i quali per insufficienza dicapitali non poterono mai lottare in modoserio coll’industria straniera, e non fabbri-cavano quindi che un piccolissimo numerodi pianoforti, e di più strumenti assaimediocri. […] nella sola capitale [Torino]si fabbricano già pianoforti in numerouguale alla metà circa di quelli che ciprovengono annualmente dall’estero, eche da alcuni anni si è già tentato con suc-cesso di esportarne una certa quantità.

In past years, although we had highlyskilled makers, capable of producingexcellent instruments, owing to lack ofcapital, they were never able to competeseriously with foreign industry, and conse-quently manufactured a very small num-ber of pianos, fairly mediocre instrumentsmoreover […] just in the capital [Turin]the number of pianos previously manufac-tured was about half those imported annu-ally, whereas for several years now a suc-cessful attempt has been made to export acertain number.

In accordance with the data in Table 2 therefore, it can be stated that in 1858-60 production was around 250-300 pieces annually (Fig. 3).

169


Fig. 3. Upright pianos manufactured at Turin and presented at the National Exhibition of indus-trial products held in that city in 1858. Note the pianino (a kind of cottage piano) by Giovanni

Berra: its greatly reduced height gave the same results described in the caption to Fig. 1, withreference to the pianoforte inclinato; this was clearly an attempt to unite the advantages of the

square piano with those of the upright. From Album descrittivo dei principali oggetti esposti nel realecastello del Valentino in occasione della sesta esposizione nazionale di prodotti dell’industria nell’anno 1858,

Torino, Ufficio dei Brevetti d’invenzione, [1858], Plate XII (opposite p. 56), detail

The war with Austria, resulting from the well-known events of the Risorgi-mento, and the immediate market orientation toward the upright piano weretwo factors that right from the start favoured the adoption – by all these firms –of the French-type Stossmechanic. This proved to be a decisive advantage forthem. At the same time, the Kingdom of Piedmont and Sardinia gravitated natu-rally in the cultural orbit of France, whose piano industry – according to CyrilEhrlich – reached its height during the same period 1848-57.74

74 Charles Timbrell, France, Piano industry in, in Enc1994, pp.139-141: 140.

patrizio barbieri

170

STATE YEAR1852 1853 1854 1855 1856 1857 1858 1859

Francia 414-

425-

288-

423-

5322

6792

4652

2374

Austria - LombardoVeneto 572

282

251

261

212

242

231

41

Svizzera 14

13-

10-

18-

20-

191

252

9-

Inghilterra 13-

2-

5-

1-

1-

2-

31

-1

Ducati di Parma, Piacenza, Modena, Toscana, Monaco e Mentone

24

2-

--

31

37

26

22

24

Napoli 2-

1-

1-

--

--

1-

--

-2

Zolverein (Associazione tedesca) 2-

--

1-

--

--

--

--

--

Romagna [Stati pontifici] --

--

1-

--

--

-1

--

-1

America meridionale -2

--

-5

--

-3

12

-12

-20

Russia (Mar Nero) --

-1

1-

--

--

--

-1

-1

Spagna --

--

22

-1

--

--

12

-1

Brasile --

--

--

-2

-1

-1

-1

--

Tunisi e Tripoli --

--

--

--

-6

--

--

--

Turchia --

--

--

--

--

-7

-17

-2

Algeria --

--

--

--

--

--

1-

--

TOTAL 49112

4713

3338

4715

57721

72822

52044

25237

Table 2. Kingdom of Piedmont and Sardinia: imports (above) and exports (below) of «square, grand, and upright pianos» («pianoforti a tavola, a coda e

verticali»), years 1852-59. The names of the single states are the original ones

75 The data in Table 2 is taken from Ministero delle Finanze. Movimento commerciale del [year], com-pilato per cura dell’Azienda generale delle gabelle (Torino, Stamperia Reale, [year of issue, as a rulethe one immediately after the year to which the data refers]). The series indicates only the yearsfrom 1851 to 1859 included. In Table 2 the data for 1851 is not indicated, because not in line withsubsequent years (in 1851 the sole scanty exports are however only towards the ‘Duchies’). For1858 note that, after the peak in 1857, piano imports decrease.76 [G.F. Lencisa], Relazione sull’esibizione dei prodotti dell’industria fatta a Parigi nell’anno 1849 e sullostato dell’industria in Francia preceduta da cenni storici sulle esibizioni fatte nei diversi stati d’Europa e segui-tata da uno studio economico d’applicazione al Piemonte, Torino, Stamperia Reale, 1850, pp. 31-35, 125-128.

Table 2 provides a foreign trade summary for the Sardinian state in thedecade prior to unification.75 It shows that during this early phase the newlyset-up Turin industries managed only to raise exports from a few pieces to afew dozen pieces, but that on the average they did not succeed in haltingimports, almost all of which from France. It also provides an overall view oftrade between the pre-unification states of Italy and Piedmont. Such surveysappear to have been the only ones systematically published in the Peninsulaat that time, since the Kingdom of Piedmont and Sardinia – aware of theimportance of economic statistics – was the first to print such data annually,establishing a model that was faithfully reproduced in subsequent years,always published by the Ministry of Finance, the latter having in the mean-time become that of the Kingdom of Italy.

§3. From Unification to the First World War: the industrialisation phase

Taken together, Tables 1a-b-c-d show that the trade balance of the pre-unifica-tion states surveyed in 1860 was disastrous: 681 imported pianos, against justover 18 exported.

Up to mid-century, the Italian states’ participation in exhibitions abroadhad been almost zero: foreigners showed disbelief on being told that manu-facturing exhibitions were also being organised in Italy.76 At the Great Exhi-bition in London in 1851 the only states to take part were the Kingdom of Sar-dinia, Tuscany, the Papal States, and a few towns in Lombardy-Veneto (thelatter, however, under the denomination «Austria»): they presented mostly

171


artistic objects, but no pianos.77 The outcome of this participation was sum-marised as follows:78

77 Great Exhibition of the Works of Industry of all Nations 1851. Official descriptive catalogue, iii: For-eign States, London, Spicer Brothers & W. Clowes and Sons, 1851, pp. 1303, 1289, 1295-6 (Ducciorgan), 1285, 1006 (the Kingdom of Naples not shown); Gallo Martucci, Il conservatorio d’artie mestieri cit., pp. 99-100.78 Le esposizioni industriali, «Annali universali di Statistica», series ii, xxxiv, 1853, p. 108.79 Epicarmo Corbino, Cinquant’anni di vita economica italiana 1915-1965, a c. di Franca Assantee Domenico Demarco, i, Napoli, Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane, 1966, p. 71.80 La Esposizione Italiana del 1861 […], Firenze, Bettini, 1862, pp. 268-269.81 Exposition Internationale de 1862. Royaume d’Italie. Catalogue officiel […], Paris, Renou etMaulde, 1862, p. 285 («les fabriques italiennes sont obligées de borner leur travail à combiner dansle meilleur mode possible les différentes pièces procurées à l’étranger, en les perfectionnant par-fois, et en cherchant toujours d’en tirer le plus grand effet de sonorité, de douceur, ou de durée»).82 Ruta, Storia critica cit., p. 185.

patrizio barbieri

172

La mortificante accoglienza che ebbero inostri artigiani ed artisti che esposeroprodotti d’arte al palazzo di Hyde Park hafatto ad essi perdere la voglia di arrischiar-si ad altre pubbliche mostre.

The mortifying reception given to our arti-sans and artists exhibiting art objects inthe palace at Hyde Park made them loseany desire to risk attending any other pub-lic exhibitions.

In the year of unification (1861), the first national exhibition was organised atFlorence, for the purpose of demonstrating the status of Italian industry which,moreover, hardly shone for the number of its participants in the mechanical sec-tor.79 Six piano manufacturers received awards (amongst whom Nicolò Lachin,for a grand piano – as was emphasised – built wholly by him).80 In 1862 Italy washowever in a position to take part in the international exhibition in London: forthe piano, the conclusion was that «Italian factories are forced to limit their workto assembling as best possible different components procured abroad».81

In order to stimulate growth in what was confirmed as the weakest sector,import taxes for materials and accessories were raised to four times higher thanfor the importation of an entirely pre-assembled piano.82 The above tax for thelatter was drastically decreased and brought to an average 3.5%, equal to thevalue already in force in the Kingdom of Sardinia, which was among the lowest

83 Mangone, L’industria nel Regno di Napoli cit., pp. 23-24.84 Betocchi, Forze produttive della provincia di Napoli, ii, p. 286 (liras «1.7 di diritto fisso, più 5%sul valore»).85 Betocchi, Forze produttive cit., vol. 2, p. 286: «under the previous regime, from 1840onward, the tax paid on each pianoforte amounted to 507 lire» (an extremely high value, con-sidering that a little further on we read: «with us, an upright costs a minimum of 880 lire, whileabroad it costs 600»).86 Relazioni dei giurati e giudizio della R. Camera di agricoltura e commercio della Esposizione nazionaledi prodotti delle industrie seguita nel 1858 in Torino, Torino, Unione tipografico-editrice, 1860, p.clvi: «Square pianos have almost fallen into disuse, and grands are reserved for Academies orgreat concert halls. […] From the Paris factories come the best of the uprights, in making whichthe workshops of Vienna had to succumb and imitate the French» («I pianoforti a tavolo sonopressochè passati in dissuetudine, e quelli a coda sono riservati per le Accademie o per le sale digrandi concerti. […] Dalle fabbriche di Parigi si hanno i migliori di que’ verticali, nella cui fabbri-cazione i lavori di Vienna dovettero soccombere all’emulazione Francese»).87 Betocchi, Forze produttive cit., ii, pp.186, 288 (data in Table 3).

in Europe.83 In 1874, according to Betocchi, the import tax on any piano wassteady at lire «1.7 fixed charge, plus 5% of the value».84

Let us now analyse the developments triggered by these premises.

3.1. Naples. What we have just seen explains why this sudden wave of free-trade was ruinous for Neapolitan industry, also remembering that in 1859 thepiano import tax was around 15-16% (as can be deduced from the data in Table1b), a value that in 1840 must have been even higher.85 It survived for a whilethanks to its grand pianos, but the market was by now decidedly orientatedtoward the very middle-class and cheaper pianinos, as they then called lowupright pianos originally brought out by Pleyel in 1815 (characterized by verticalstringing, in imitation of the English ‘cottage piano’). As early as 1860, these hadalready replaced the ‘squares’ (known as «a tavolo» or «quadrati», from theFrench piano carré), which also brought about a slump in Viennese productionitself (Fig. 4).86 The collapse of the Neapolitan market is quantified by the datain Table 3, relating to the city’s customs; Alessandro Betocchi, who has providedthese figures, also recalls with regret the former «abundant exports to all theNeapolitan provinces as also to the Sicilian; in short we had a market of about 9million persons».87

173


patrizio barbieri

174

Fig. 4. Models of pianos on sale in Italy in 1885. From Enciclopedia delle arti e delle industrie compila-ta colla direzione dell’ingegnere M.se Raffaele Pareto [...], iv, Torino, U.T.E.T., 1885, plate vii (p. 715)

Table 3. Pianos recorded by the Naples Customs, years 1864-1873

MOVEMENT YEAR

1864 1865 1866 1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1873

Imported (N°) 192 118 11 118 81 177 169 152 - -

Imported (Liras) 108,383 74,574 66,866 86,395 53,028 134,787 121,039 96,570 109,131 65,109

Exported (N°) - - 13 6 12 8 17 14 10 -

Exported (Liras) - - 10,375 7,025 11,400 3,800 11,950 10,000 - 7,550

88 Ruta, Storia critica cit., p.186. Betocchi, Forze produttive cit., i, plate I-B (opposite p. 96),gives some data from the 1871 census: «106 lavoranti di chitarre o altri strumenti» (104 at Naples,2 at Pozzuoli) and «51 lavoranti in pianoforti» (all in Naples).89 On the affairs of this factory see Marco Tiella, Giacomo Ferdinando Sievers (1810-1878)costruttore di pianoforti a Napoli, in Liuteria musica e cultura 1999-2000, a c. di Renato Meucci,Lucca, LIM, 2001, pp. 43-53.90 Ruta, Storia critica cit., pp. 186-187; I cento anni della Casa Curci, Milano, Curci, 1960, pp. 8-13;Alessandra Cruciani, Curci, in Dizionario biografico degli italiani, xxxi, Roma, Istituto dellaEnciclopedia Italiana, 1985, pp. 412-415; Nunneri, Relazione cit., p. 5; H. Prestreau,Guida gen-erale di Napoli e provincia, anno viii, Napoli, Gennaro & Morano, 1907, p. 985.91 Nunneri, Relazione cit., pp. 7-8.92 Betocchi, Forze produttive cit., ii, p. 289.

As a result, in 1877 Neapolitan manufacturers of any substance had fallen to 13,two of whom were winding up and four «limited to selling foreign pianos».88

Sievers, who in 1877 was left with just 12 workers, died in 1878, and shortly after-wards his factory was forced to close.89 Pasquale Curci – who for some time hadattempted to manage Sievers’ firm, but who will go down in history as the founderof the famous publishing house of the same name – several years later obtained anexclusive mandate for Southern Italy to sell pianos produced by Erard and Pleyel:even later on, Neapolitan manufacturers – excluding a few pure artisans – fell toseven in 1887, and to four in 1907, finally fading out shortly afterwards.90

That the causes of this were really the ones just mentioned is confirmed bythe Relazione [Report] of Luigi Nunneri, dated 1887: «The tax on raw materialsfor manufacture that we have to order abroad, since our homeland lacks facto-ries, is far higher than the cost of a piano». He also states that it was the high taxon accessories – then classified by the Customs as «fine haberdashery» («merce-ria fina») – that led to the rapid increase in pianos imported from abroad andmarked the decline of the «arte del pianofortista», which «constituted the firstwealth of this our city».91 This also had repercussions on the production of bar-rel pianos, for which Naples was especially distinguished:92

175


I materiali di questi pianini sono per la mas-sima parte provvenienti dall’estero; solo illegname, il pioppo, è nostro […] come dal-l’estero vengono per mezzo d’una Casagrossista di Milano, le felpe, i martellini, le

The materials for these pianinos for themost part come from abroad; only the tim-ber, the poplar, is ours […] just as fromabroad, through a Milanese wholesaler,come the felts, hammers, strings, and even

It should be added that the Neapolitans did not consider any recourse to counter-measures like their Viennese colleagues under similar circumstances: seeing thethreat of growing imports of uprights from the then rapidly expanding Germanindustry, in 1873 the latter gathered together in the «First Viennese ProductionCooperative».93 To such forms of association, however, Italian individualismremained impervious. The situation was eloquently summarised by the already-mentioned Betocchi in his report to the Naples Chamber of Commerce in 1873:94

93 Huber, Austria cit., p. 33.94 Betocchi, Forze produttive cit., ii, pp. 287-288.

patrizio barbieri

176

corde, e perfino la colla di pesce, chè malriuscirono i tentativi di voler usare quellache si produce a Caserta; i pianoforti nonreggevano né a lunghi né a corti viaggi.

the fish glue, since any attempt at usingwhat is produced at Caserta never succeeds;the pianos would not survive any transport,whether long or short.

quest’industria che richiederebbe vastiopifici e ricco capitale per fare utilmentegrosse forniture di legnami e di metalli, esoprattutto grosso capitale per aspettarecon calma la vendita dei prodotti […] èesercitata in modo, che un solo operaio odue incominciano dal piallare il legname eprocedono man mano al lavoro di comple-tamento e d’abbellimento.Usano in Austria, che ad una Commissione– Gewerbs Commission ovvero MeisterZunft – composta de’maggiori fabbricantidella capitale si presenti l’operaio chevoglia prendere a costruire pianoforti, esottoponga ad essi il suo lavoro, non soloper valutare il grado della perizia, ma chedimostri altresì avere egli i mezzi di poterstabilire una fabbrica conveniente. Ed ovequesto non provi, il cembalo prodotto dalui resta depositato in una apposita sala; laMeister Zunft gli fissa il prezzo del piano,al disotto del quale non può essere vendu-to. Si mira così ad impedire il pullulare di

this industry, which would require vastfactories and considerable capital to makemajor supplies of timber and metals prof-itably, and more especially great capital towait calmly for the sale of its products […]is carried out in such a way that just one ortwo workers begin by planing the woodand gradually proceed to the completionand decoration of the work. In Austria, it is the custom for a Commis-sion – Gewerbs Commission or MeisterZunft – comprising the major manufactur-ers of the capital to present any workerwho wishes to build pianos and submitshis work to them, not only to assess hisdegree of skill, but also to demonstratethat he has the means to set up a factoryproperly. Should this not be proven, thecembalo [= piano] produced by himremains stored in a room set aside; theMeister Zunft establishes the price of hispiano, below which it may not be sold.This aims at preventing the proliferation

95 Corbino, Cinquant’anni di vita economica italiana cit., p. 72.

Betocchi adds that the great foreign industrial structure at Naples had alsocaused a slump in violin and guitar making:

177


nuovi industriali, impotenti a migliorare lecondizioni della produzione, capacissimiinvece di degradarla, col far più difficile ilcòmpito de’ produttori esistenti.Questo sistema, che ricorda tempi di unodiato regolamentarismo, che ricorda leMaestranze e i Capi d’opera, noi nonsapremmo certo desiderare che risorgessedalla sua tomba, però faremmo voti, che glioperai si persuadano che vi sono certe pro-duzioni, di cui non è possibile l’esercizio inangusti limiti, e che ove non le sorregga ilcopioso capitale, debbono man manointristire, fino a morire, trascinando nellaruina chi si lusingò che potesse bastare ilbuon volere e l’instancabile operosità.

of new industrialists, incapable of improv-ing production conditions, and highlycapable on the other hand of degradingthem, by making the task of existing man-ufacturers more difficult. Such a system, recalling the times of odiousregulation, recalling Workers and Foremen,we certainly do not desire to resurrect fromits tomb, but we shall take a vow that theworkers may be persuaded that some typesof production cannot be carried out withinnarrow limits and, if not supported by con-siderable capital, must gradually wilt anddie, dragging to ruin those who flatteredthemselves that all that was necessary wasgoodwill and untiring industry.

A nulla giova che il nostro acero sia eccel-lente, e le corde buone, e men care che pergli stranieri; l’arte se n’è ita. La concorren-za che ci fa l’estero è invincibile, non solopel pregio delle opere ma per la tenuità delprezzo. Un nostro artefice non potrebbeprodurre un violino a meno di 25 o 30 lire,ed alla Mostra Universale di Vienna furo-no trovati abbastanza buoni quelli checostavano sole 5 lire. Tanto può fare l’indu-stria esercitata con forti capitali e col sussi-dio delle macchine!

It is to no avail that our maple is excellent,[gut] strings sound, and less expensivethan for foreigners; the art has vanished.Foreign competition is invincible, notonly for the value of the works, but fortheir low prices. One of our artisans couldnot produce a violin for less than 25 or 30liras, and at the Vienna Universal Exhibi-tion those that cost only 5 liras were foundto be pretty good. That is what industrycan do, backed with strong capital andautomation!

In northern Italy, on the other hand, the just emerging piano industry underwentfewer traumas. Indirectly it also enjoyed some of the advantages common to theremaining sectors of production, including:95

• being closer to the industrial areas of central Europe, with better com-munication networks;

• more capital available and a more favourable attitude on the part ofcredit institutions, which in actual fact also held a considerable part of the sav-ings of southern Italy;

• in 1861, out of a male population between 12 and 18 years from whichfuture skilled workers could be recruited, in Piedmont only 25% were illiterateand in Lombardy 33%, whereas in the South the figure was closer to 80%.96

3.2. Milan and Florence. Starting from the mid-nineteenth century, virtuosoplaying aimed at achieving maximum sonority, exploiting arms and shoulders.This caused a slump in instruments with sensitive action, like Vienna action,which was increasingly affected by broken strings and hammer shanks that cameout of their hoppers or even broke.97 To provide louder sound, even the pianostructure based on English action had to be modified and strengthened: thecross- and highly-strung strings, introduced for the purpose, necessitated a sin-gle cast-iron frame. All this contributed to the so-called «American system» ofconstruction, which Steinweg – who, on moving to New York, had anglicized hisname to Steinway – had launched in 1867 and which was immediately adopted bythe then-emerging German industry (see, for example, Bechstein).98 It was resis-ted, however, not only by the Austrians, but also by the English and particularlythe French, and became one of the main causes of the latters’ decline.99

96 Even ten years later the situation had still not changed. Out of a total population registered in1871, the number of illiterates was, in fact, (in %): Piedmont and Liguria 28.79, Lombardy 34.37,Veneto 48.99, Tuscany 60.22, Rome 67.58, Naples area 75.78, Sicily 80.21; data taken from L’Italiaeconomica nel 1873, Roma, Barbera, 1874, p. 125.97 Eszter Fontana, Il suono del pianoforte nella Germania del Sud (o Viennese), typewrittenreport presented on November 11th 2000 at Bologna, Accademia Filarmonica di Bologna, Inter-national Symposium Il pianoforte nell’Ottocento e l’Accademia Filarmonica di Bologna, p. 6.98 Edwin M. Good, Steinway & Sons, in Enc1994, pp. 374-378: 375-6; Craig H. Roell, UnitedStates, Piano Industry in the, in Enc1994, pp. 415-419: 416; Sandra P. Rosenblum,Overstrung, inEnc1994, p. 256; Frederic Schoetter, Bechstein, in Enc1994, pp. 42-43.99 Chouquet, La musica all’Esposizione di Parigi cit., p. 44, concerning the Steinway modelremarks: «English and French manufacturers are more reserved about using metal, and it seemsthey do not apply cross-stringing except by way of a trial» («La fabbricazione inglese e la francesehanno usato maggiori riserve nell’uso del metallo, e sembra che non applichino le corde incroci-ate se non come prova comparativa»); Rosenblum, Overstrung; Timbrell, France cit., p. 140.

patrizio barbieri

178

100 Farina, La musica all’esposizione industriale milanese cit., p. 326 («col sistema francese, chesagrifica alquanto l’effetto e la sonorità della voce alla pastosità inalterabile del timbro»).101 Ministero di agricoltura, industria e commercio. Statistica industriale. Lombardia, Roma, Bertero,1900, p. 452.

In §2 we saw that Angelo Colombo was one of the first in Italy to introduce bothoverstringing on an enlarged soundboard and the metal frame. However, in 1871 a crit-ic on the «Gazzetta musicale di Milano» – the very same who mistakenly attributedSteinway’s invention to him – took him to task for making pianos using the «Frenchsystem», which penalised the sound volume to the advantage of tone colour.100

Despite the fact that Milanese industry in the sector was fairly active at thattime (in 1875 Rodolfo Grimm’s 50 workers produced 300 uprights per year,including the action), in 1900 it was reduced to rather modest dimensions: statis-tics for that year reveal that the four piano factories operating in Milan, amongstthese stand out Colombo and Angelo Norcini, employed a total of just 28 work-ers.101 Of the former Lombardy-Veneto, on the other hand, a solid nationwidereputation was acquired by Maltarello (whose 100 workers, as early as 1871, pro-duced 150 pianos per year, action included) and, starting from the early twentiethcentury, Anelli (Fig. 5). Sound manufacturers were also found at Trieste, but thistown – up to 1918 – was still an integral part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire.

179


Fig. 5. Upright overstrung piano made by the factory «V. Maltarello e Figli» of Vicenza. From L’Esposizione teatrale (Esposizioni riunite - Milano 1894), «Gazzetta musicale di Milano», LIX, 1894, p. 355

At Florence, the firm Ducci revived momentarily (with Carlo, still active in1888, also in London), while in 1875 the firm Brizzi and Niccolai launched intomajor piano production that lasted up to the First World War.

3.3. Turin. Immediately after Unification, numerous factories were added tothe four set up in 1850-52. All of them went straight into the industrial produc-tion of upright pianos, at once coming up against the unsolved problem ofactions and accessories. As far as the former are concerned, an illuminating criti-cism was made with regard to an instrument presented at the Milan exhibitionin 1871, for which the Turinese Berra had built «even the actions, which most Ital-ian manufacturers prefer to procure abroad, since with a slight increase in pricethey are unchallengeably superior to those produced in Italy».102 Some manufac-turers were supplied by Maltarello, but – as had already occurred abroad – a needwas felt for a specialist in the sector: the first in Piedmont was Carlo Perotti, whoin 1870 set up a firm that initially produced only actions. The situation at thattime is summarised by the merciless analysis of Salvatore De Castrone Marchesi,the official Italian representative for musical instruments presented at the Vien-na Universal Exhibition in 1873. On pianofortes, he says:103

102 Farina, La musica all’esposizione industriale milanese cit., p. 327 («anche le meccaniche, che lapiù parte dei fabbricanti italiani preferiscono far venire dall’estero, dove con poco aumento diprezzo si hanno incontrastabilmente migliori di quelle che si fabbrichino in Italia»).103 Salvatore De Castrone Marchesi, Istrumenti musicali, in Relazioni dei giurati italianisulla Esposizione Universale di Vienna del 1873, i, Milano, Regia stamperia, 1873, pp. 47-63: 59-60,where he adds: «Italy is more backward in the manufacture of pianos than Spain, where atBarcelona a certain Bernareggi, owner of a major complete factory, wholly equipped with steam-driven machinery and the most up-to-date tools, produces even the smallest items required fortheir manufacture» («L’Italia trovasi per la fabbricazione dei pianoforti più indietro della Spagna,la quale possiede in Barcellona un certo Bernareggi, proprietario di una grande fabbrica completa,fornita di tutte le macchine a vapore, e degli utensili più moderni, e producente ogni cosa piùminuta necessaria a tale costruzione»).

patrizio barbieri

180

Le poche e meschine fabbriche di questiistrumenti, esistenti principalmente inNapoli e Torino, non possono infatti chia-marsi tali, poiché esse ritirano da Parigi eda Vienna quasi tutte le forniture intereper i pianoforti, il feltro, i profili, le corde,le armature in ferro, ecc., ecc., dimodochè

The few and wretched factories for theseinstruments, located mainly at Naplesand Turin, cannot really be called suchbecause they procure from Paris andVienna almost all the whole supplies forpianofortes, the felt, profili, strings, ironframes, etc., etc., so that most of the

104 Achille Montuoro, Esposizione nazionale di Milano 1881. Rapporto sugli istrumenti musicali,«Gazzetta musicale di Milano», xxxviii, 1883, pp. 215-216: 215.105 Esposizione universale di Anversa del 1885. Catalogo generale della sezione industriale italiana,Roma, Fratelli Centenari, 1885, p. 170.106 R. L., De’ saggi delle manifatture napoletane esposte nella solenne mostra del 1836, p. 93 (onMichele Kovats); Sievers too says he used mother-of-pearl (Sievers, Il pianoforte cit., p. 183),probably inspired by Kovats, whose employee he had been from 1834 to 1835: Tiella, GiacomoFerdinando Sievers cit., p. 46. As far as Egidio Helzel is concerned, on the other hand, we know thatat the 1853 exhibition he presented a pianoforte with a keyboard of «cristallo inciso»: «Gazzettamusicale di Napoli», iii, 1854, p. 10; for this he applied for and obtained a ten-year patent:Maione, Seller, Prime ricognizioni archivistiche cit., p. 26.107 Sievers, Il pianoforte cit., p. 183, tells us that one type of synthetic ivory, mainly based ongutta-percha, had, «for several years already» been obtained by the Americans, but was deemedtoo soft for the keys. Bakerlite, on the other hand, was only invented in 1909, also in the United

The most serious problem concerned accessories, such as felts, cloths, strings,tuning pins, ivory key-covers, and ebonies. Even before 1874 Maltarello had beenthe first in Italy to manufacture felts, but his production was clearly inadequate,since a commentator on the 1881 Milan Exhibition called for a reduction of taxeson such products, noting that – even twenty years later – the onerousness of the lat-ter had still not stimulated the setting up of industries in the sector.104 Just one yearafter the said exhibition (1882) Perotti invented «a rapid machine for lining andcutting hammers», introducing «into Italy the industry of felted hammers».105

For key-covers, at Naples several manufacturers had already employed moth-er-of-pearl (Kovats, 1836) and crystal (Helzel, 1853),106 but such materials, andporcelain too, were found unpleasant to the touch. With the progress of industrialchemistry, the problem would be solved autarchically, also for organs and harmo-niums, by the use of synthetic materials such as synthetic ivory and bakerlite.107

181


una gran parte del danaro ch’esse ricavanodallo scarsissimo numero degl’istrumentiche fabbricano va all’estero.L’unico fabbricante di profili, e di mecca-niche di pianoforti e melopiani presenta-tosi a questa esposizione, è un tale CarloPerotti di Torino. Ancorchè i suoi lavorisiano imperfetti, e non possano quindisostenere vantaggiosamente il confrontocon quelli esposti dai grandi e provettifabbricanti in questo genere, [questa suaattività dev’essere incoraggiata].

money they receive for the very modestnumber of instruments they producegoes abroad.The only manufacturer of piano andmelopiano profili and actions present atthis exhibition is a certain Carlo Perottiof Turin. Although his production is notperfect and cannot to any advantagesustain comparison with those exhibit-ed by major proven manufacturers inthis sector, [his activity should beencouraged].

It was steel strings however that caused the greatest headaches, even inFrance.108 The best quality ones were produced in Austria and Bavaria: in themid-nineteenth century, the renowned firm Miller of Vienna was supplyingpiano manufacturers throughout Europe, including Broadwood.109 The problemwas only solved – for Italy too – during the First World War, when the produc-tion of hardened steel wires expanded greatly as a result of their demand for thenascent aeronautical industry, which used them for bi- and tri-planes.110

Thanks to all this, in 1881 Turin produced 800-900 pianos per year, rising toabout 1600 in 1898.111 In 1911 the same city numbered about thirty artisan-type fac-tories, which rose to 48 a decade later, each producing an average of two or threepianos per week; to these we should add a certain number of workshops that madeaccessories.112 Some manufacturers were however of a certain size, as shown inTable 4. The situation was thus no longer unbalanced, as at Naples half a centuryearlier and, at the same time, the still craftsmanlike dimension of accessory suppli-ers prevented (meagre consolation) any problems of monopoly arising from thesaid suppliers, problems that, on the other hand, did arise in Germany.113

States, by the Belgian chemist Leo Hendrik Baekeland: Bakelite, in Encyclopaedia Britannica, ii,Chicago […], Benton, 1971, p. 1043.108 Chouquet, La musica all’esposizione di Parigi cit., p. 61, writes (1881): «France successfullyproduces copper strings, which it supplies cheaply, but it continues to be a tributary of Englandand Germany for steel strings» («La Francia fabbrica con buon successo le corde di rame che for-nisce a buon mercato; ma continua ad essere tributaria dell’Inghilterra e della Germania per lecorde di acciaio»). For English strings, he names the factory of William-Dick Houghton.109 Alfons Huber, Wire, in Enc1994, p. 440. Sievers too, Il pianoforte cit., pp. 207-210,names only the Viennese Martin Miller’s Sohn («celebre fabbricante di corde di acciajo») andPoehlmann of Nuremberg (“fabbricante di corde di acciajo novellamente perfezionate”). OnMoritz Poehlmann, see Joel & Priscilla Rappaport, Strings / Stringing, in Enc1994, pp.383-384: 384.110 Taylor, England cit., p. 122. Very high carbon content steel (0.80-0.85 %), with the additionof silicon (0.20-0.40%), manganese (0.15-0.20%) and phosphorus (0.03%): Henri Bouasse,Cordes et membranes. Instruments de musique à cordes et à membranes, Paris, Delagrave, 1926, p. 4.111 Guida tascabile descrittiva e commerciale di Torino […], 3rd edn, Milano, Guigoni, 1881, p. 134.For 1898 the sum derives from the annual turnovers of each Turinese manufacturer indicated inGaetano G. Foschini, La musica all’Esposizione Generale Italiana di Torino 1898, «Rivista musi-cale italiana», v, 1898, pp. 786-836.112 Il pianoforte italiano, «Strumenti e musica», March 1982, p. 66; Intervista con Antonio Cuconato,accordatore, «Strumenti e musica», April 1978, p. 104.113 Carsten Dürer, Germany, Piano industry in, in Enc1994, pp. 146-148: 147.

patrizio barbieri

182

114 Ministero di agricoltura, industria e commercio. Statistica industriale. Piemonte, Roma, Bertero,1892, p. 288 («i fabbricanti di pianoforte in Torino trovano di loro convenienza far preparare ipezzi di legname dalle segherie tenute da altri industriali, per cui non abbisognano loro motorimeccanici, né macchine accessorie di qualche importanza»).

183


MAKER YEAR N° PIANOS PER YEAR

N°WORKERS

Aymonino 185818731898

200150220

35-

45-50Berra 1858

189240-

610

Chiappo 18921898

-100

20-

Clotz-Thibaux 1858 12 4Colombo F. c.1890 160 25Marchisio frat. c.1870 250-300 -

Mola 18921900

-500-1,000

50more than 100

Perotti 1873188518921898

actionspianos + actions

-250 + actions

1040-50

3360

Roeseler 1858187618781898

6400

450-500300

less than 4-7065

Table 4. Solidity of some piano manufacturers at Turin in the second half of the nineteenth century

Again, in 1892, even major producers suffered from the handicap of lack ofautomation, only Mola being equipped with a steam engine (of only four horse-power). A survey carried out that year noted that «piano manufacturers in Turinfind it more convenient to have their timbers prepared at the sawmills owned byother industrialists, so that they do not need mechanical engines or ancillarymachinery of any importance».114 In Italy, automation was to develop only dur-

ing the «marvellous flourishing» («meraviglioso rigoglio») of industry from1902-11,115 during which period Mola emerged as the top Italian manufacturer ofpianos and harmoniums, to the point of being included by Dolge in the chapteron «Men who made the piano industry» (1911).116 In these years, Piedmontassumed the importance that Naples had had half a century earlier, with the dif-ference that its production – though inferior in quality – was no longer protectedby tariffs and most of its accessories were manufactured locally (Fig. 6).

115 Corbino, Cinquant’anni di vita economica italiana cit., i, p. 74.116 Dolge, Pianos cit., p. 216. In 1880-90 the Mola factory was managed by the Berliner WilhelmSteuer: HubertHenkel, Rapporti fra Italia e Germania nella costruzione di strumenti a tastiera nelloro commercio nel secolo xix, type-written report presented on 11 November 2000 at Bologna,Accademia Filarmonica di Bologna, International Symposium Il pianoforte nell’Ottocento e l’Acca-demia Filarmonica di Bologna, p. 5.

patrizio barbieri

184

Fig. 6. Comparison of the number of manufacturers of pianos, accessories and automaticpianos, from 1820 to 1940, operating in the city of Naples and in the Piedmont Region (the

approximate trend is taken from statistics currently available). Note the sharp fall in Neapolitanindustry after 1861 (annexation to the Kingdom of Italy) and in Piedmontese industry after 1929(the Great Depression, aggravated by the spread of radios, gramophones and small family cars)

117 Arthur W.J.G. Ord-Hume, Player Piano, in Enc1994, pp. 294-296.118 Arthur W.J.G. Ord-Hume, Street piano, in Enc1994, p. 381.119 Betocchi, Forze produttive cit., ii, pp. 288-289 («per la più parte, sono di fabbricazione ital-iana questi pianini che in Italia e all’estero son trascinati per le vie e fatti suonare con poco com-piacimento di chi è studioso o infermo»).120 Dolge, Pianos cit., p. 167.

3.4. Automatic pianos and melopianos. The period from 1900 to 1930 saw thewidespread promotion of pianos driven pneumatically by perforated cards, eitheron drums or folding cardboards. These ‘player pianos’, provided shortly aftertheir invention also with dynamic expression (‘expression pianos’), were devel-oped mainly in the United States, where they were manufactured by most tradi-tional piano factories (the ‘Pianola’ model of the Aeolian Company was to becomeemblematic). These automatic devices, occasionally associated with mechanicalstring instruments, also saw great technological evolution in Germany.117 Theindustry also took root in Italy – see Racca of Bologna and FIRST (Fabbrica Italia-na Rulli Sonori Traforati) of Milan –, but most were imported from the two coun-tries mentioned above. In §4 we shall see the negative impact that habituation tothis kind of passive listening had on the traditional pianoforte.

In Italy, the poor relation of these instruments was invented and later devel-oped in England and manufactured from the mid-nineteenth century to about1940, for outdoor use: the small upright pianola (‘street piano’), often mountedon a handcart, its hammers driven – using a handle – by a wooden barrel provid-ed with appropriately arranged metal pins (and subsequently also by perforatedcard, as already mentioned).118 Alessandro Betocchi – who in this connexionindicates the factories of Giuliano (Naples) and Vosgien (Novara) – as early as1874 states that «they are mostly of Italian manufacture, these pianini that in Italyand abroad are dragged through the streets and made to play, little pleasing asthey are to those studying or the infirm».119 In 1911 Dolge would confirm that«no doubt Italy produces more barrel and pneumatic street pianos than anyother country, but these noisy instruments are only intended to amuse childrenon the public highways and cannot be classed with pianos».120 Besides these lat-ter, widespread in Italy were also the barrel pianos, driven by a clockwork motor,for indoor use, especially in cafés and other public venues. On this subject, Ord-Hume observes: «These last two categories are the ones most closely associatedwith the Italians, both itinerant manufacturers and street musicians travelling to

185


France, Germany, England, and America to produce them in large quantities”.121

This confirms the stereotype of the poor Italian organ-grinder and his organetto.122

Among pianos that – at the player’s command – could engage a clockworkdevice to prolong the sounds by rapid hammering, we should also mention the‘melopiano’ or ‘armonipiano’, perfected and manufactured at Turin by the engi-neer Luigi Caldera. It met with great success between 1870 and 1890, to the extentthat its action was adopted by Kirkmann in England and by Herz in France. In1888 Sgambati even had the great concert Schiedmayer at Rome’s Conservatoryadapted in this way at the Milanese workshops of Messrs Ricordi & Finzi.123

3.5. The Results. The Unification of Italy – with the abolishing of internal cus-toms, the rapid growth of the railway network, the increasing well-being of thepopulation and consequent formation of an ever-widening middle class – meantthat around 1880 several piano manufacturers had taken on a nationwide dimen-sion. The protagonists of this period include Aymonino (Turin), Brizzi & Nicco-lai (Florence), Maltarello (Vicenza), followed by Colombo, Grimm (bothMilanese), Mola, Perotti, Roeseler, and Berra (the last four from Turin). This,moreover, is also reflected by the mechanical industries generally speaking: ascompared to the Florence Exhibition in 1861, the one in Milan in 1881 showedthat their number had doubled, together with the number of workers employedand the value of their turnover (Figs 7 & 8).124

121 Arthur W.J.G. Ord-Hume, Barrel piano, in Enc1994, pp. 41-42: 41.122 In 1892, for example, the five firms at Novara also manufacturing pianos (Luigi Vosgien, CarloPombia, Ottina e Pellandi, Società Italiana, Giovanni Colombo) were simply classified as manu-facturers of «organetti»: Ministero di agricoltura, industria e commercio. Statistica industriale.Piemonte, p. 202. On the subject see the most complete survey by Antonio Latanza, Il piano acilindro. Alla riscoperta di un’eredità musicale dimenticata, Roma, Aracne, 2009.123 Varietà. Esposizione Universale di Vienna. Sezioni di strumenti musicali, Gruppo XV. Italiani pre-miati, «Gazzetta musicale di Milano», xxviii, 1873, pp. 255-6; Chouquet, La musica all’espo-sizione di Parigi cit., pp. 59-61; L’armonipiano, «Gazzetta musicale di Milano», xliii, 1888, p. 153;Soffredini, L’armonipiano Caldera della Casa Ricordi e Finzi alla Reale Accademia di Santa Cecilia inRoma, idem, pp. 73-74. On the rise and decline on this kind of instrument, see Barbieri, Violicem-balos and other Italian sostenente pianos cit.124 Corbino, Cinquant’anni di vita economica italiana cit., i, p. 71.

patrizio barbieri

186

187


Fig. 7. Pianos and organs at the Milan Exhibition of 1881. On the left, beside the upright pianos,are the display cabinets containing wind instruments by the famous Milanese firm Pelitti.

From L’esposizione italiana del 1881 in Milano illustrata, Milano, Sonzogno, [1881], p. 92

Fig. 8. The «Galleria dei pianoforte» at the Turin 1884 Exhibition. From Album-ricordo dellaEsposizione nazionale del 1884 in Torino, Milano, Treves, 1884, part ii (G. Robustelli,

L’eposizione industriale), table opposite p. 66

From the vague production data available (4000-6000 pianos annually) and, onthe other hand, the accurate foreign trade tables, it can be assumed that, in thedecade prior to the First World War, Italian industry managed to satisfy at least two-thirds of domestic demand for pianos. Production was not however quantitativelyhigh, considering that the Turin area compensated almost entirely for former activi-ty in Naples, which earlier supplied the whole of continental southern Italy. Owingto limited spending, sales were largely restricted to upright pianos, whereas in theUnited States, for example, sales of uprights and grands were almost equal.125

125 Pianoforte, in Enciclopedia italiana di scienze, lettere ed arti, xxvii, Roma, Istituto della Enciclo-pedia Italiana, 1935, pp. 108-120: 119 (in 1929 the highest world producer was the United States,

patrizio barbieri

188

STATE YEAR1864 1866 1868 1870 1872 1874 1876

America Meridionale -6

-9

-40

--

--

-47

-18

Austria (Lomb. Veneto) 2027

1468

24512

37129

55849

27930

45323

Egitto --

--

--

--

--2

--10

--

Francia 1,354-

7085

799-

1,093-

1,07619

50126

88647

Grecia -9

--

--

--

-2

--

--

Inghilterra 12-

12-6

--

--

646

52

144

Roma (Province romane) 92

95

912

12-

--

--

--

Spagna -5

-131

--

--

--

--

--

Svizzera 394

28-

11-

22-

-17

-6

236

Tunisi e Tripoli --

-4

--

--

--

--

--

Turchia --4

--76

--

--

--44

--3

--6

Zollverein (“Germania” from 1873 )

--

--

44-

154-

41-

25-

70-

altri 305

181

--

-41

--

--

--

TOTAL 1,64642

909245

1,10864

1,65270

1,681179

810124

1,446104

Table 5a. Kingdom of Italy: imports (above) and exports (below) of «square, grand, and uprightpianos» («pianoforti a tavola, a coda e verticali»), years 1864-1876. The names of the single

states are the original ones

which however met «domestic demand almost entirely»: of the 130,012 pianos produced thatyear, 69,135 were uprights, 60,877 grands). In Germany, on the other hand, 1928 productionincluded 28,000 uprights and 10,000 grands.

189


Table 5b. Kingdom of Italy: imports (above) and exports (below) of upright pianos (togetherwith those of the square type) and grands

(in Table: upright-grand, in that order), years 1880-1914. In these Ministry publications, pianos are split into uprights and grands starting from 1878

STATE YEAR1864 1885 1891 1897 1902 1905 1910 1914

America merid.(others)

-10-0

-14-0

-13-0

-14-0

-6-0

1-020-1

-14-0

-36-1

Argentina --

--12-0

--

-41-0

-21-0

-61-0

1-088-1

-35-6

Austria-Ungheria 70-5227-7

409-9612-4

408-2610-1

166-1018-0

129-924-2

243-10139-2

281-115-2

43-011-0

Belgio e Paesi Bassi

--

15-0-

--

2-0-

2-0-

--

24-012-1

4-0-

Brasile --

--

--

-13-0

-28-0

-18-0

-37-0

-8-0

Egitto -18-0

-14-0

-3-0

-7-0

-2-0

-7-0

0-17-0

-5-0

Eritrea, Cirenaica e Tripolitania

--

--

--

-2-0

-4-0

-2-0

-1-0

-19-0

Francia 617-13483-4

525-5960-0

246-2260-1

103-823-1

86-1925-7

115-1426-1

149-1352-0

46-1135-0

Germania 226-28-

674-85-

647-66-

772-866-0

952-8131-3

1,690-12091-0

3,707-1707-1

3,026-11914-0

Giappone, Cina,India and others

--

--

--

--

-3-0

-11-0

-1-0

--

Gran Bret. e Irl. 10-0-

41-3-

-7-0

6-22-0

5-22-0

14-04-0

82-12-0

98-72-1

Grecia, Russia e Montenegro

--

--

--

--8-0

--

--4-1

--3-0

-14-0

Spagna + Gibilt. --

-11-0

-3-0

--

--

5-01-0

60-1-

3-0-

Stati Uniti --

--

--

2-24-0

-12-0

37-04-0

105-53-2

195-17-0

Svizzera 0-05-0

36-08-2

17-211-1

6-118-2

42-536-0

46-637-1

13-234-1

8-034-1

Tunisi, Algeria, Malta e altri

--

--

--

-11-1

--7-0

-13-0

2-02-0

-16-1

Turchia e Cipro 0-017-4

--

--

-2-0

-4-0

-6-0

-4-1

-10-0

TOTAL 923-214160-15

1,700-243131-6

1,318-116107-3

1,057-109169-4

1,216-116205-12

2,151-150444-6

4,424-204272-9

3,423-138246-10

Tables 5a-b show that between 1864 and 1914, piano exchanges with othercountries increased on the average, but the export-import ratio remained fairlylow, fluctuating around 5-10%.126 Italy’s modest exports were mostly limited tothe markets of the eastern Mediterranean and South America (see, for example,Aymonino, F. Colombo, Grimm, Maltarello, Mola, Roeseler, Turconi). As earlyas 1868, however, the Italian Economic Yearbook published by Pietro Maestrinoted, perhaps somewhat hastily, a decrease in imports and an increase in«domestic work».127

The said tables also reveal, starting from about 1875, an inexorable decline inimports from France (whose industry had for some time begun to rest on its lau-rels) and from Austria (owing to the no longer up-to-date Prellmechanik and tothe loss, in 1918, of the Empire’s remaining provinces). Their place was progres-sively occupied by a decidedly expanding Germany after the proclamation of theGerman Empire (Versailles, 1871), whose production in the early twentieth cen-tury even invaded the Italian market. The German piano industry, like the Ital-ian, was a family business (1681 firms in 1907, most of which with fewer than 20employees), but of much higher quality, also as a result of domestic suppliers ofaccessories and actions (it suffices to mention Renner, founded in 1882 and stillworld leader of the sector).128 Italian manufacturers were still some way fromachieving this quality, as witnessed by the awards – on the average not superla-tive – obtained at the principal international exhibitions (Table 6, which showsthat only Mola – and only in 1900 – managed to obtain a gold medal).129 As far as

126 The data in the said tables is taken from Movimento commerciale del Regno d’Italia […], for theyear: 1861-70 Torino, Stamperia reale; 1871-78, Milano, Stamperia reale; after 1879: Roma,Tipografia Elzeviriana.127 Pietro Maestri, L’Italia economica nel 1868, Firenze, Civelli, 1868, p. 238, indeed states:«Whereas some years ago the value of piano imports exceeded one million liras, in 1866 it wasonly 474,000 lire» («Mentre qualche anno addietro il valore dell’importazione dei pianofortioltrepassava il milione di lire, nel 1866 non fu che 474.000 lire»). Table 5a, however, raises theobjection that Maestri reached this hasty conclusion solely on the basis of a year that was excep-tionally favourable to Italy.128 Dürer, Germany cit., pp. 146-7; Lloyd W. Meyer, Renner, Louis GMBH & Company, inEnc1994, p. 322.129 Another gold medal was, however, obtained by Luigi Magrini of Trieste, when the town wasstill under Austrian sovereignty: kindly communicated by Dr. Marta Finzi, of the Museo Teatrale“Carlo Schmidl” of Trieste, a museum that possesses an «L. Magrini & Figlio», a splendid uprightin liberty style, whose trade-mark advertises a «Goldene Medaille Wien 1892» and «Torino 1898».

patrizio barbieri

190

130 Corbino, Cinquant’anni di vita economica italiana, p. 78 («il più grande opificio automobilisti-co d’Europa»).

mere mass production is concerned, it may be that the Italian piano industrylacked that stimulation provided for Fiat, for example, by the dramatic produc-tion requirements of the critical war situation in 1917, as the result of which theTurin firm in 1920 found itself «the largest car works in Europe».130

191


MAKER EXPOSITION PRIZE

Alessandroni (Rome) Vienna 1873 Medal for Merit

Aymonino (Turin) Vienna 1873 Honourable Mention

Brizzi & Niccolai (Florence) Paris 1878Paris 1889

Bronze MedalSilver Medal

Caldera (Turin) Vienna 1873Paris 1889

Medal for MeritSilver Medal

De Meglio Giovanni (Naples) London 1870Vienna 1873

Second Class medalMedal for Merit

De Meglio Leopoldo (Naples) London 1862 Honourable Mention

Fusella Francesco Vienna 1873 Honourable Mention

Giuliano fratelli (Naples) Vienna 1873 Honourable Mention

Lifonti (Palermo) Paris 1878 Bronze Medal

Magrini Luigi (Trieste) Vienna 1892 Gold Medal

Mola (Turin) Paris 1867Vienna 1873Paris 1878Chicago 1893Paris 1900

“Prize-winner”Medal for MeritBronze MedalFirst Class Diploma Gold Medal

Roeseler (Turin) Paris 1878 Bronze Medal

Sievers (Naples) Vienna 1873 Medal for Merit

Volpi Gustavo (Florence) Paris 1889 Bronze Medal

Table 6. Awards received by Italian piano manufacturers at major international exhibitionsin the second half of the nineteenth century

In Tables 5a-b, the United States are poorly represented, despite thegiddy numerical development mentioned in the introduction to this study.Indeed, their production, also because it was better adapted to the greatchanges in climate over their vast territory, was largely restricted to domes-tic consumption (as already seen in fn 125). Its growth, however, was basedon a managerial mind-set still lacking in Italy, which availed itself of (1) ahigh degree of automation, (2) widespread distribution networks, includingthe new ‘department stores’, (3) funding strategies that even then made pur-chases possible on credit and by correspondence, (4) greater investments bymanufacturers in the musical education and advertising sectors. For massproduction, their partnership strategy proved decisive: in 1914 just 25 cor-porations and holdings produced 74% of the annual total of 320,000 pianosthen manufactured.131

§4. Between the Two Wars: the ‘commercial’ piano and the Great Depression

Immediately after the Great War, an operation was attempted at Turin to setup something similar to the above-mentioned American holdings, resulting inthe incorporation of Fip (Fabbrica Italiana Pianoforti), which was to merge allthe small workshops in the city. As had already occurred in the U.S., its policyextended to the educational and advertising sectors, with the foundation ofthe magazine Il pianoforte and the organisation of periodic piano recitals.132

Initially producing 800 instruments per year, in 1925-27 Fip managed to reachan annual production of 3000, with 800 workers. It was thus aiming at repro-ducing the Fiat success story in the piano sector (even the style of its brandname recalled that of the car works), but, just one decade after it opened, it lostits sponsors and was forced to close.

In the post-war period, the Anelli factory became an important stabilizingfactor. Its success started only in 1896, the year in which Cremona was select-ed as its permanent base. Among its patents, the 1912 one – making it possible

131 Roell, United States cit., p. 417.132 «Il pianoforte. Rivista mensile della Fabbrica Italiana Pianoforti (F.I.P.)»: the first editioncame out in January 1920.

patrizio barbieri

192

to regulate the touch of the keyboard was highly successful, meeting with theapproval of the Königliche Hochschule für Musik of Berlin Carlottenburg, themost important German conservatory. In 1918, the Cremona factory was pro-ducing five pianos per day, and in 1923 had 300 workers; in 1961, instrumentswith the ‘Anelli’ mark totalled 21,000 (almost all uprights).

Again in Lombardy, in 1922 Anelli was joined by Zari (Bovisio, Milan), animportant firm set up in 1869, among the first to introduce woodworkingmachinery, which up to then had been restricted to producing wooden flooring.

At Turin, Fip’s bankruptcy accentuated the manufacturers’ tendency tofragment and thence to the marketing of what Dolge had already called the‘commercial’ piano, a phenomenon that did not spare the United States,with the ‘stencil piano’.133 The wide popularity of German pianos (see Table7 and Fig. 9)134 also meant that most Italian instruments were marketedunder anonymous Germanic-sounding trade-marks, whereas in 1871 theyhad still been French-sounding.135 This change of approach was also theresult of preferences expressed by the best-known Italian composers: where-as Verdi rejected highly interesting proposals so as not to be parted from hisold Erard, Puccini and Mascagni on the other hand preferred instruments ofGerman manufacture.136

193


133 Roell, United States cit., p. 417. Such instruments were of medium-low quality, manufacturedanonymously by many factories and sold to retailers, who applied a fantasy trademark (stencil) tothe lid of the keyboard. 134 Data taken from Movimento commerciale del Regno d’Italia, for the year.135 Farina, La musica all’esposizione industriale milanese [dated 1871] cit., p. 325: «many Italian –highly Italian – pianos enter the market baptised as French» («molti pianoforti italiani, italianis-simi entrano in commercio col battesimo francese»).136 On Verdi: [De Rensis], Cento anni di Casa Anelli cit., pp. 101-102; on Puccini and Mascagni:La Casa Musicale G. Ceccherini cit., pp. 12-14.

patrizio barbieri

194

Table 7. Kingdom of Italy: imports (above) and exports (below) of upright pianos (together with those of the square type) and grands (in Table: upright-grand,

in that order), years 1919-1938. The names of the single states are the original ones

STATE YEAR1920 1925 1930 1932 1935 1938

America merid. (oth-ers)

-34-0

-15-0

-6-0

-1-0

--

-1-0

Argentina -66-0

-27-3

-5-1

0-11-1

--

--

Australia -5-0

-2-0

--

-1-0

--

--

Austria 196-71-

124-461-0

75-150-1

22-6-

83-36-

--

Belgio e Paesi Bassi

18-0-

1-01-1

14-01-0

-1-0

--

1-0-

Brasile -20-0

-36-0

1-0-

--

-2-0

-0-1

Ceco-Slovacchia 3-0-

75-13-

8-0-

0-1-

--

--

Egitto 1-010-0

1-010-0

1-02-0

1-01-0

--

--

Francia 164-4282-3

71-1914-1

40-261-0

6-02-3

1-03-0

--

Germania 261-53-

2,150-2630-2

2,285-184-

348-571-1

251-870-1

182-1120-6

Gran Bret. e Irlanda 6-52-2

18-31-0

33-0-

4-15-0

1-0-

--

Grecia -20-0

-11-0

-3-0

--

--

-2-0

Jugoslavia e altri -2-0

2-020-8

1-09-4

-8-3

3-14-1

1-08-1

Libia, Africa Or. It.,Dodecanneso

-14-0

-19-0

1-024-0

-28-0

-23-0

-70-7

Stati Uniti 31-23-1

19-66-0

6-33-0

4-02-1

1-1-

1-0-

Svizzera 31-234-1

1-025-2

4-02-0

-1-2

--

-2-0

Tunisia, Algeria, Marocco

-45-0

2-09-0

-4-1

-4-0

--

--

Turchia e Cipro 1-030-0

1-0-

1-0-

--

--

--

TOTAL 712-175367-7

2,465-350197-17

2,470-22860-7

385-6656-11

340-12532-2

185-11283-15

Occasionally, manufacturers included in their fantasy trademarks some more orless subtle reference to their own name: Carlo Perotti (still under French influ-ence), for example, produced ‘P. Charles’, the engineer («ingegnere») CesareBerra, «Baer Berlin – I.C.B.», Antonio Fea, «F.E. Anton», Biancotto, «Weiss-chen», Rodolfo Griffini, «G. Rudolf», Merula, «Merual», Antonio Fabio,«Faber». Often they even used deformations of the names of famous Germanmanufacturers (such as «Rudinbach e Sonn» for «Rud. Ibach Sohn», «Sidmay-er» for «Sciedmayer», «Bekstain» for «Bechstein», «Blutmann» for «Blüthner»),which, as early as 1924, raised formal protests from the German Piano Industrial-ists’ Association. At the end of the ’twenties – in the famous «Page of ItalianShame» (Pagina della vergogna italiana), published as a booklet with an edition of15,000 copies – Pietro Anelli pointed out to the public the names of as many as 40Italian manufacturers, at least 25 of whom in Turin, using fantasy trademarks.137

195


Fig. 9. Trend of piano imports in Italy from 1861 to 1940, per state of origin (data taken fromTables 5a-b and 7). Note the two drastic falls corresponding to the First World War and the fol-

lowing Great Depression of 1929, the latter aggravated by other concomitant factors

137 [De Rensis], Cento anni di Casa Anelli cit., pp. 110-112. Pietro Anelli, Chi non sente l’orgogliodel suo nome nel proprio lavoro non ha patria. Le marche false sui pianoforti italiani: un problema dimoralità, Cremona, Società Anonima Anelli, 1930. A copy of the said Paginawas given me sometime ago by Giovanni Doria, of «Strinasacchi s.n.c.» (Verona), whom I wish to thank.

At a meeting of specialists in 1932, the Turinese Vincenzo Restagno – chair-man of the national association of musical instrument manufacturers – reportedthat 90% of the manufacturers then operating in Italy were applying pseudo-Germanic trademarks to their pianos. Since such instruments were marketedanonymously, the manufacturer had no incitement to safeguard his name in anyfashion, but aimed solely at beating down competition by saving on materials.Restagno reported soundboards and bridges that cracked owing to the «absolutelack of seasoning of the timber», and even wrest planks that – instead of beingmade of solid beechwood – were made of poplar and veneered with beechwood,with easily imagined repercussions on the tightness of the tuning pins fixed tothem.138 The disastrous consequences of the commercial piano were sum-marised in the report of Giulio Pasquali, also presented at the 1932 meeting, con-cluding indignantly: «Is it necessary to recall the 22,000 German pianos sold in asingle year in Argentina against 9 from Italy?».139 This phenomenon was onlypartly stemmed starting from 22 June 1933, when a law, pressed for by PietroAnelli, made it obligatory to mark each instrument with the manufacturer’sname and the location where it had been produced.140

For the piano worldwide, however, the deepest slump was to arrive with theGreat Depression that followed the Wall Street crash in October 1929. Concomi-tant causes included: the increasing diffusion of radio transmissions (starting inItaly in 1924), the advent of talking movies (starting in the United States on anindustrial scale in 1926, which made piano accompaniment superfluous), and theincreasingly accessible price of the car, a consumable that – as a status symbol –started to replace the piano in middle-class families (in Italy, the various modelsof the popular ‘Topolino’ started on the production line in 1936). An importantrole was also played by the spread of the automatic piano, which had habituatedthe public to passive enjoyment of music, so that it was soon found easier andeconomically cheaper to switch to the radio and gramophone.141 Within a singleyear (1930), this led automatic pianos to near extinction (Table 8), as well as

138 Vincenzo Restagno, Pianoforti, in Artigianato degli strumenti musicali. Atti della riunione diesperti tenutasi in Napoli il 25 e 26 giugno 1932-X, Firenze, Vallecchi, 1933, pp. 13-15.139 Giulio Pasquali, Esportazione e importazione, in Ivi, pp. 71-75: 74.140 [De Rensis] Cento anni di Casa Anelli cit., p. 113.141 Roell, United States cit., p. 418.

patrizio barbieri

196

142 The data in Table 8 is taken from Movimento commerciale del Regno d’Italia, for the year. Asregards Chiappo, see Annarita Colturato, L’industria dei pianoforti a Torino nell’ Ottocento, inMiscellanea di studi cit.

inducing several manufacturers to change-over to producing wirelesses (in Italy,for example, the Turinese Chiappo started on wireless production in 1928, and in1930 stopped producing pianos, including automatic models).142

197


STATE YEAR

1925 1930 1932 1935 1938

America Meridionale -13-0

-2-8

--

--

--

Austria 28-1-

-0-3

--

--

--

Cecoslovacchia 24-0-

--

--

--

--

Egitto e Turchia -2-0

--

--

--

--

Francia 3-0-

1-2-

--

--

--

Germania 416-302-0

69-93-0

5-6-

0-1-

0-3-

Gran Bretagna e Irlanda 17-4-

4-00-1

--

--

--

Libia e altre colonie italiane -4-0

-1-1

-2-0

-1-0

--

Stati Uniti 202-2-

37-2-

5-1-

4-0-

3-0-

Svizzera -2-2

--

--

--

--

altri -8-0

-8-0

--

--

--

TOTAL 690-3731-2

112-138-20

10-72-0

4-11-0

3-3-

Table 8. Kingdom of Italy: imports (above) and exports (below) of automatic pianos, uprightsand grands (in Table: upright-grand, in that order), years 1920-1938. The names of the single

states are the original ones

Even the traditional instrument suffered a collapse: in 1930, Italian produc-tion amounted to 6000 pianos (always insufficient for the domestic market,since in that same year imports numbered almost 2700 pieces), but in 1937 wasreduced to about 1000 (Table 9a-b).143 Furthermore, even abroad, things wereno better: from 1927 to 1932 in the United States, production dropped from250,000 to 25,000 pieces per year, and in Germany from 100,000 to a miserable6000.144 In that decade, the Italian industry relied in particular on Anelli, Zariand Schulze & Pollmann, founded in 1928 near Bolzano, which soon became theproducer of the best Italian grand pianos of the time.

143 Pianoforte, in Enciclopedia italiana, xxvii, p. 119. The data in Table 9 is taken from ISTAT. Censi-mento industriale e commerciale 1937-1939. Vol. vii: Industrie varie e fono-cinematografiche. Serviziindustriali, Roma, Istituto Poligrafico dello Stato, 1949, pp. 30-31.144 Ehrlich, Pianoforte cit., p. 709.

patrizio barbieri

198

TYPE FACTORIES(N°)

PIANOS(N°)

VALUE(Liras)

Upright 26 1,026 3,100,561Grand 4 43 288,305Player piano 3 5 17,015

Table 9a. Pianos officially manufactured in Italy for the year 1937

REGION PIANOS(N°)

VALUE(Liras)

Piemonte 585 1,605,661

Lombardia 126 499,400Venezia Tridentina 280 980,000Venezia Giulia e Zara 5 15,500TOTAL 1.026 3,100,561

Table 9b. Distribution per region of upright pianos officially manufactured in Italy for the year1937. The names of the single regions are the original ones

145 The data in Table 10 is taken from Movimento commerciale, for the year.146 [De Rensis], Cento anni di Casa Anelli cit., p. 108.

§5. The Second Post-War period: the invasion of Asian industry and the birth of‘Fazioli’

The post-war period was characterised by progressive growth in imports, whichhad seen an obligatory halt during the previous period of «autarchy»(«autarchia»). Among supplier countries, West Germany was soon joined, espe-cially for studio pianos, by several East-European countries (Table 10); in 1960,for example, East Germany and Czechoslovakia covered 44% of all orders.145 Inaround 1962 Japan joined the fray, followed, roughly ten years later, by SouthKorea. Starting from 1993-94 the latter was practically supplanted by the Peo-ples’ Republic of China, a prime exporter of uprights. Taken together, these threecountries appropriated increasing slices of the Italian market (see also Fig. 10):0.3% (1962), 4.3% (1970), 5.6% (1972), 22.8% (1980), 54.8% (1988), 55.1% (1997).Again, in 1997 Japan alone provided 38% of Italian imports of grand pianos, amarket sector traditionally dominated by Germany. This also changed one of thefeatures noted by Pietro Anelli in a speech in 1923: «only countries locatedbetween the 40° and 50° degree of latitude north produce pianos for all the restof the world» (nowadays, ‘40°’ should be corrected to ‘30°’).146

199


Fig. 10. Trend of piano imports in Italy from 1950 to 1997, per state of origin (data taken from Table 10)

patrizio barbieri

200

Table 10. The Italian Republic: imports (above) and exports (below) of new pianos, uprightsand grands (in Table: upright-grand, in that order), years 1951-1997.

Starting from 1990 the Istituto Centrale di Statistica (ISTAT) tables only provide data with acertain consistency, so from that year on the table the symbol / replaces the missing data).

The names of the single states are the original ones

STATE YEAR1951 1960 1962 1970 1975 1980 1990 1997

America centro-mer.

-16-2

-11-0

-2-1

-0-2

2-012-15

0-10-4

//-2

//

Austria 30-25-

56-170-1

27-19-

1-855-4

85-396-0

89-586-33

/-22/

//-12

Cecoslov. 93-17-

246-76-

358-1731-0

1056-2511-5

1613-1042-0

2890-1600-6

2006-//

//

Cina --

--

--

9-0-

283-0-

793-98-

//

2804-//

Corea delSud

--

--

--

--

248-123-

2306-1200-2

4467-1604/

471-94/

Francia 20-10-

6-20-2

-1-1

70-321-6

6-31129-132

148-11631-627

/1,014-38

/429-5

GermaniaR. Democr.

--

204-57-

251-76-

974-114-

2340-11757-2

7067-2524-0

1421-//

//

GermaniaR. Federale

65-1070-5

244-1631-4

434-1361-0

3053-102112-2

3991-596393-79

2709-993606-164

2012-393249-149

1548-362161-17

Giappone --

--

33-31-

308-72-

1729-3937-0

4391-1438-

2501-1293/

3749-543/-13

Gran Bret. 84-9-

157-57-

213-45-

762-470-1

5123-28027-0

3384-45383-5

/114-7

//

Paesi Bassi --

16-1-

17-03-1

68-0-

190-051-22

144-0352-1

/172-2

776-31748-4

Spagna 1-0-

--

-0-1

--

-54-0

-6-36

/135-/

/213-/

Stati Uniti 1-2-

1-114-3

2-00-11

1-10-1

144-100-1

647-14733-146

//

//

Svizzera 1-01-1

-2-3

31-167-2

107-592-4

296-3738-47

180-3390-98

//-102

/57-/

U.R.S.S. and Polonia

--

--

99-0-

572-341-0

1095-1-

2232-47-

//

//

others 1-13-5

24-021-13

48-021-4

174-138-17

519-12262-66

1203-4943-273

//

//

TOTAL 296-17120-13

954-37449-26

1513-49636-21

7155-1592140-42

17664-4375818-364

28183-80491174-1395

15319-38162172-326

12465-14471538-153

147 See also Roell, United States cit., p. 418.

As far as Italian production is concerned, exports – which had always beenmodest – grew progressively up to 1992, the year in which they reached their his-torical maximum of 3,157 instruments (with as many as 390 grand pianos),shipped in particular to France, Spain, and Germany.

In the last decades of the century, Italian commercial production was locatedalmost entirely in the Marche and in Trentino, manufactured mainly by the fol-lowing firms:• Farfisa (Ancona), an accordion factory that, from 1960 up to its closure in

December 1998, also made upright pianos (3600 per year in 1978).• Generalmusic, set up in 1983 at Saludecio, Forlì (3000 uprights in 1985).• Clement, set up at Bolzano in 1937, closed in 1991 (600 uprights per year from

1983-87).• Schulze Pollmann, mentioned above.• Steinbach, set up in 1935 at Turin (200 uprights per year in 1991).

Starting from 1992, however, a steep decline began worldwide in the produc-tion of upright pianos, marking the worst slump in the sector after 1929. Causesare many, in particular the accentuated competition of other forms of recreation(satellite television, the internet, videogames) and – in the musical sector – digi-tal techniques (midi virtual keyboards and real electronic ones, downloadingprograms with real-time listening).147 Currently (2010), most Italian productionin the commercial sector is restricted to Schulze Pollmann, which in June 1998moved to Fermignano, Pesaro, and was taken over by Generalmusic (1500-2000instruments produced in 2002, including grands). After the closure of General-music, as a result of the worsening global slump mentioned above, Schulze Poll-mann have continued activities in the Republic of San Marino. On the otherhand, as far as accessories are concerned, since 1991 Enrico Ciresa s.r.l. (Tesero,Trent) has been supplying some of the most far-off world factories with sound-boards made of the celebrated red spruce from the Val di Fiemme in the WesternItalian Alps, the same once used by Stradivarius.

Going on to concert grands, Cesare Augusto Tallone, the former technicalmanager at Zari (1923), in about 1940 set up his own personal workshop. Aftertwenty years of experimentation – encouraged by Arturo Benedetti Michelan-geli, whose personal tuner he was – he managed to produce his «piano with an

201


«Italian sound» («pianoforte dal suono italiano»), presented at the Milan Con-servatory in 1967. Tallone however produced on the whole not more than 300pianos, each of which may be considered a prototype.

Lastly, special mention must be reserved for Paolo Fazioli, a Roman engineerand pianist who, in 1981 – at Sacile, Pordenone (60 km northeast of Venice) – setup a handcraft factory for highly selected concert grands, which in a very shorttime ranked with the very best at international level. Currently he producesabout 100 pianos per year, and has built about 1850 up to 2010, 95% being export-ed. In more than a century and a half of activity, it seems that Italian industry hasfinally managed to produce a concert piano renowned worldwide, with its ownparticular characteristics.

patrizio barbieri

202

Finito di stampare da Futura Grafica srl, maggio 2013

studi musicali - Patrizio Barbieri · studi musicali nuova serie. anno 04. 2013. numero 01 nuova...

Documents

Transcript of studi musicali - Patrizio Barbieri · studi musicali nuova serie. anno 04. 2013. numero 01 nuova...