2017 was our 20th year online!

Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums
Over 3 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments.
Over 100,000 members from around the world.
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers (it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

Shop our online store for music lovers
SEARCH
Piano Forums & Piano World
(ad) SWEETWATER Cyber Week Deals
(ad)
Best of Piano Buyer
 Best of Piano Buyer
(ad)
Faust Harrison Pianos
Faust Harrison 100+ Steinway pianos
(ad)
Wessell Nickel & Gross
PianoForAll
Who's Online Now
76 members (An Old Square, 36251, Bellicapelli, brdwyguy, bobrunyan, Abdol, 21 invisible), 725 guests, and 471 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
(ad)
Estonia Pianos
Estonia Pianos
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 4 of 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 9 10
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 6,045
E
6000 Post Club Member
Offline
6000 Post Club Member
E
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 6,045
Josef Hoffman wrote a small amount about force differential between soft playing and loud playing in his remarks about the Accelerated Action.

He intimated, (and I am reading much between the lines from his remarks), that an action that played too easily soft requires a pianist to use the arm/shoulder to suspend the hand so much that the arm weight cannot be used to depress the key. This makes the weak finger muscles do all the work which rapidly tire and can only be strengthened a small relative amount by practice. Overuse of the forearm muscles rapidly manifests as pain/paralysis in the forearm, wrist and 4th and 5th finger.

Then when you switch to forceful exertion, the time interval for the tensed muscles to relax is slower than the time interval it takes to tense other muscles. This slows down the pianists ability to alter force to the keys.

All these things put your body overall in tension.

It is much better if the action has sufficient resistance at soft playing to help hold your arm up slightly.

It is also much better if the resistance the action presents to strong playing "disappears" as the force put into the keys rises.

It is also much better if the return of the keys is fast enough to lift the relaxed finger up with it.

The added bonus to actions configured to respond this way is the treble tone is clearer and warmer, the regulation is more stable. and the longevity of the components is greatly increased.

Me thinks the piano is trying to tell us something! NO?


In a seemingly infinite universe-infinite human creativity is-seemingly possible.
According to NASA, 93% of the earth like planets possible in the known universe have yet to be formed.
Contact: toneman1@me.com
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,078
J
4000 Post Club Member
OP Offline
4000 Post Club Member
J
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,078
OK I've thought of something.

It's still early stage brainstorming.

We can't get a load of pianists to continually practise on badly regulated pianos and wait for them to be injured, that would be unethical at best.

The thing that we can do is, that we know that certain movements in piano playing cause or encourage injury, especially when combined with great tension.

The general thinking on the subject is that moving outwith a comfortable range of motion eventually causes injury, over-use causes injury, and excessive force causes injury.

You can't get someone to work long term on bad pianos to find out what happens to them, but you can take a group of pianists and find out which actions encourage excessive movements, in terms of force, in terms of range of motion. For example, does a piano regulated in a particular way cause a pianist to use excessive tension and excessive finger motion even at low volumes?

If we found out that the answer to that question was yes, based on a sample survey, we could then start to determine the importance of action regulation on the health of pianists.

What I think we will find is what we already know, that there is a mid-range of touch that allows for a healthy range of motion, healthy use of force, and doesn't cause over-use of the same kind of motion.

A pianist would really only need one hour on a piano, maybe two, in order to assess whether it was uncomfortable or comfortable to play on.

Every study has anomalies. There will be those pianists who prefer something much heavier, or much lighter than the 'norm', but I think we'll find that most pianists gravitate into a mid-range.


YAMAHA Artist
Joined: May 2020
Posts: 42
H
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
H
Joined: May 2020
Posts: 42
Here is a page of information on musicians and injuries. The page has a helpful list of books, DVDs, and links.

http://rsi.unl.edu/music.html#jonas


Good music has no expiration date.

1920 Mason & Hamlin Model A
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,779
J
2000 Post Club Member
Offline
2000 Post Club Member
J
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,779
Originally Posted by Joseph Fleetwood
OK I've thought of something.

It's still early stage brainstorming.

We can't get a load of pianists to continually practise on badly regulated pianos and wait for them to be injured, that would be unethical at best.

The thing that we can do is, that we know that certain movements in piano playing cause or encourage injury, especially when combined with great tension.

The general thinking on the subject is that moving outwith a comfortable range of motion eventually causes injury, over-use causes injury, and excessive force causes injury.

You can't get someone to work long term on bad pianos to find out what happens to them, but you can take a group of pianists and find out which actions encourage excessive movements, in terms of force, in terms of range of motion. For example, does a piano regulated in a particular way cause a pianist to use excessive tension and excessive finger motion even at low volumes?

If we found out that the answer to that question was yes, based on a sample survey, we could then start to determine the importance of action regulation on the health of pianists.

What I think we will find is what we already know, that there is a mid-range of touch that allows for a healthy range of motion, healthy use of force, and doesn't cause over-use of the same kind of motion.

A pianist would really only need one hour on a piano, maybe two, in order to assess whether it was uncomfortable or comfortable to play on.

Every study has anomalies. There will be those pianists who prefer something much heavier, or much lighter than the 'norm', but I think we'll find that most pianists gravitate into a mid-range.
If you wanted to do such as study I think right now you are at the level of developing your theory- That poorly regulated pianos contribute to injuries in pianists but at some point you want to delve into the specifics and utilize the scientific method to test your theory.

You might want to start by writing a grant. Perhaps a music society might offer such grants? Then you want to describe your proposal in writing.

If I were to do such a study I would first define my and null hypothesis and the alternative hypothesis. The null hypothesis is that "piano regulation is not a contributing factor to piano injuries" and the alternative hypothesis could be "poorly regulated pianos contribute to injuries in pianists". In science the investigators always try to reject the null hypothesis to accept the alternative hypothesis. Null hypothesis testing is a formal approach to deciding whether a statistical relationship in a sample reflects a real relationship in the population or is just due to chance and you could set that probability levels at say .05 or .001 percent something called a p value. p=.05 or p=.001. This is the real basics of a scientific study. You are essentially proving that the results of your study have a less than .05 or .001 being due to chance.

Then I would want to describe my test subjects and my control group. The test subjects could be a randomly chosen professional pianist or university student who believes they have a piano playing related injury and the control group could be any random professional pianist or university student without an injury. You would have to be selective in your test group looking at things such as age, sex, height, finger length, forearm length, type of injury, severity of injury etc. Same for the control group and after defining these variables you would want to remove anyone who was an outlier, statistically defined as any variable you find important but who was shown to be 2 standard deviations from the mean.

Once you have your test subjects and control group you would want to have your methodologies in place. I would use a double blind study where neither the pianist or the tester knew what was actually being studied. The study could be something along the lines of: We are doing a study measuring the relationship between the types of music a pianist plays and piano related injuries. But you say you are just interested also in the kind of pianos they play and a tester would take some information about your piano in your home or studio. As a benefit you get a free tuning and will be debriefed on the full nature of the study once the results are in. You would get this study out into the piano public with flyers, emails, through music societies, speaking to universities, preferably in big cities with lots of pianists.

The tester in this situation ideally would be a registered piano technician who would rate on something called a likert scale the regulation condition of the test subjects and or control subjects piano. So from a scale from 1 to 5 they would rate the condition of regulation. Zero being poorly regulated, three being average and five being excellent. Then they would have a checklist designed by the investigator that specifies exactly what was off in the regulation. It could be unevenness of the action again on a likert scale it could be key weights measured in grams etc or anything that would indicate a poor regulation. The reason for the double blind study is because if the RPT knew what the study was testing and he knew the test subject had an injury he or she might "find" something wrong with the piano which he/she might have not found otherwise if he didn't know the pianist had an injury. You want to control all the variables that might bias a study.

The test group would answer questions such as how long they practice, the measured height of their music benches, how many rest periods they take, the music they play- basically anything you can think of that might contribute to injury on the part of the pianist.

From all of this you gather your results and do your statistical analysis and in this study you could do something like a 4 way analysis of variance (ANOVA) to test your theory. Looking at all the interactions of the variables described above. So for example you might find that injuries have nothing to do with regulation but maybe sex, maybe finger length, maybe chair height, or maybe regulation and the specific things about regulation that contribute to injury, or it can be number of hours practice, or with breaks or without breaks. Or it can be ay interaction of the above variables such as poor regulation and chair height are the prime factors. You will try to prove that piano regulation is a contributing factor to piano injuries and that the results of your study have a .05 or .001 probability of being due to chance and you would also show that all the other variables that might contribute to injury are also less likely due to chance with an ANOVA test. This is the scientific method.

This is a rough idea of how such a study could be done. The grant is being obtained just to pay everyone for their time most notably the RPT who would be traveling from home to home or studio to studio to inspect each piano and to pay for the free tuning he is providing for the test subjects as well as paying for any of the investigators fees, statistician etc...

Last edited by Jethro; 03/29/21 08:49 AM.

Working on:
Preludio: Bach/Rachmaninoff E Major Sonata for Violin
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 6,045
E
6000 Post Club Member
Offline
6000 Post Club Member
E
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 6,045
Some pianists expectations of dynamic range require mastering use of a wide range of physical force. Some pianists use nuance and shading to "suggest" dynamics. And of course one pianist can be capable of both. And the most successful performers move seamlessly form one to the other as required by their sensibilities and allowed by circumstances.

Pianos are in no way standardized to specifications that allow meeting all those expectations.

Thus some pianists will be induced into exertions that exceed the limits of a particular or even the vast majority of instruments.

At the core of this discussion is how much force range should a pianists be able to use in the keys? And what are the healthy limits? And what in pianos limits application and control of key forces?


In a seemingly infinite universe-infinite human creativity is-seemingly possible.
According to NASA, 93% of the earth like planets possible in the known universe have yet to be formed.
Contact: toneman1@me.com
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,779
J
2000 Post Club Member
Offline
2000 Post Club Member
J
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,779
Originally Posted by Ed McMorrow, RPT
Some pianists expectations of dynamic range require mastering use of a wide range of physical force. Some pianists use nuance and shading to "suggest" dynamics. And of course one pianist can be capable of both. And the most successful performers move seamlessly form one to the other as required by their sensibilities and allowed by circumstances.

Pianos are in no way standardized to specifications that allow meeting all those expectations.

Thus some pianists will be induced into exertions that exceed the limits of a particular or even the vast majority of instruments.

At the core of this discussion is how much force range should a pianists be able to use in the keys? And what are the healthy limits? And what in pianos limits application and control of key forces?
The only way to find "healthy limits" is to do a study involving injured pianists and measuring the pianos they play. The other way would involve a bit of sadism and just gather a bunch of people off the street and have them press piano keys set at varying key forces for hours until we figure out what forces cause injury and how long it takes to get there.


Working on:
Preludio: Bach/Rachmaninoff E Major Sonata for Violin
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,779
J
2000 Post Club Member
Offline
2000 Post Club Member
J
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,779
One interesting side study could be if there were specific techniques in piano playing that more apt to cause injuries. For example repetitive stretches of playing 10ths, or specific repetitive movements found in certain challenging Etudes that are known to cause injuries and then finding alternative techniques to avoid them, but that it a little OT and the subject perhaps for another study.


Working on:
Preludio: Bach/Rachmaninoff E Major Sonata for Violin
Joined: Feb 2019
Posts: 469
P
Full Member
Online Content
Full Member
P
Joined: Feb 2019
Posts: 469
I read in a scientific paper ( https://www.mdpi.com/2075-1702/8/4/76/pdf ) that the reaction force that a piano key exerts on your fingers can range from 0.5 N up to 38 N, in a few milliseconds (!) The latter corresponds to a weight of almost 4 kg. No wonder you can get injured.

Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,078
J
4000 Post Club Member
OP Offline
4000 Post Club Member
J
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,078
Jethro thank you for that wonderful contribution! Yes!

Regarding some pianists and their excessive movements, we’d have to restrict the repertoire. Besides, even pianists who are using a huge dynamic range aren’t constantly practicing at their limit


YAMAHA Artist
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,779
J
2000 Post Club Member
Offline
2000 Post Club Member
J
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,779
Originally Posted by Joseph Fleetwood
Jethro thank you for that wonderful contribution! Yes!

Regarding some pianists and their excessive movements, we’d have to restrict the repertoire. Besides, even pianists who are using a huge dynamic range aren’t constantly practicing at their limit
You're welcome. Now all you have to do is write that grant!


Working on:
Preludio: Bach/Rachmaninoff E Major Sonata for Violin
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,539
W
3000 Post Club Member
Offline
3000 Post Club Member
W
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,539
Originally Posted by Joseph Fleetwood, edited
I have a hunch, and anecdotal evidence, that there is a correlation between playing a poorly regulated piano and developing injury. In my own experience, I find that I get extremely tired playing on uneven, sluggish and high inertia instruments.

I feel there needs to be a conversation so that, for example, music schools, pianists, technicians, are better equipped to deal with this.

Joe, Jethro, Everyone

This is a very good conversation. As I understood it, Joe's original aim was to extend the conversation to music schools, pianists, technicians, therapists and others. This could lead to a "concerted action" to reduce injuries and increase levels of performance.

One thesis on piano injuries says they relate to overwork. The more you overdo it, the more likely an injury. A poorly regulated piano accelerates the process of overdoing it and makes injury more and more likely as time goes on.

To reduce the likelihood of injury one has to look at ways of reducing the level of overwork. Regulating the piano is top of the list. That will also increase the level of performance, of a music school in particular.

From memory I think the rest of the list probably relates to Jethro's second "OT" project and a pianist's (current) limits. I'd say that needs to be paer of the conversation.

Strangely, a jambon (ham roll) convinced me about regulation. BBC TV had a series of a chef taking a celebrity to their favourite eateries. One lunch was the best jambon in Paris. The celebrity went to the bakers and the chef went to see hams being cooked. All the butchers had the sharpest knives the chef had ever seen. If butchers need well honed knives, pianists need well honed pianos.


Ian Russell
Schiedmayer & Soehne, 1925 Model 14, 140cm
Ibach, 1905 F-IV, 235cm
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,539
W
3000 Post Club Member
Offline
3000 Post Club Member
W
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,539
BTW the West Virginia University thesis I mentioned is Types and Causes of Physiological Injury in Piano Playing, with Emphasis on Piano Pedagogy in China . It has half a dozen pages of references to other papers.


Ian Russell
Schiedmayer & Soehne, 1925 Model 14, 140cm
Ibach, 1905 F-IV, 235cm
Joined: Aug 2018
Posts: 6,676
L
6000 Post Club Member
Offline
6000 Post Club Member
L
Joined: Aug 2018
Posts: 6,676
I think our fellow member Seeker ( Andrew) would have a great deal to really contribute to this thread.( Andrew I hope you do not mind)
I am sure Joe has his methodologies all worked out. He just needs material.

Last edited by Lady Bird; 03/29/21 05:47 PM. Reason: missing text
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 6,045
E
6000 Post Club Member
Offline
6000 Post Club Member
E
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 6,045
I think I need to be more direct informing readers that my work as a technician/rebuilder/innovator of pianos shows the vast majority of pianos made since WW2 have heavier hammers than prior pianos typically had. This raises the inertia of most piano actions into the injury domain for most pianists trying to use contrasts of maximum dynamics and tempo contrast. "Regulation" has minimal impact to the effects of hammer inertia on pianists, (I am using the term "regulation" in the more common professional usage that refers to the timing of events in the action in relation to hammer , key and string position.)

And my work has also shown that even these older pianos could benefit from reduced hammer mass from how it was when it left the factory.

In the old ways of producing fine pianos, the regulation of the action included reducing the mass of the hammers. This has mostly disappeared from modern factory regulation procedures, and the meaning of regulation has morphed some.

In my experience the piano industry has not investigated adequately the issue of action inertia and musical usage.


In a seemingly infinite universe-infinite human creativity is-seemingly possible.
According to NASA, 93% of the earth like planets possible in the known universe have yet to be formed.
Contact: toneman1@me.com
Joined: Feb 2019
Posts: 469
P
Full Member
Online Content
Full Member
P
Joined: Feb 2019
Posts: 469
Originally Posted by Ed McMorrow, RPT
I think I need to be more direct informing readers that my work as a technician/rebuilder/innovator of pianos shows the vast majority of pianos made since WW2 have heavier hammers than prior pianos typically had. This raises the inertia of most piano actions into the injury domain for most pianists trying to use contrasts of maximum dynamics and tempo contrast.

Ed, how much choice does a customer have in this regard when buying a new piano? I.e. is there still significant variation in hammer weight between different piano models and brands? E.g., does it make sense to buy a smaller upright rather than a taller one, just from the inertia perspective, if you are worried about injury?

Joined: Feb 2021
Posts: 88
A
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
A
Joined: Feb 2021
Posts: 88
Originally Posted by Jethro
If I were to do such a study I would first define my and null hypothesis and the alternative hypothesis. The null hypothesis is that "piano regulation is not a contributing factor to piano injuries" and the alternative hypothesis could be "poorly regulated pianos contribute to injuries in pianists". In science the investigators always try to reject the null hypothesis to accept the alternative hypothesis. Null hypothesis testing is a formal approach to deciding whether a statistical relationship in a sample reflects a real relationship in the population or is just due to chance and you could set that probability levels at say .05 or .001 percent something called a p value. p=.05 or p=.001. This is the real basics of a scientific study. You are essentially proving that the results of your study have a less than .05 or .001 being due to chance.

Then I would want to describe my test subjects and my control group. The test subjects could be a randomly chosen professional pianist or university student who believes they have a piano playing related injury and the control group could be any random professional pianist or university student without an injury. You would have to be selective in your test group looking at things such as age, sex, height, finger length, forearm length, type of injury, severity of injury etc. Same for the control group and after defining these variables you would want to remove anyone who was an outlier, statistically defined as any variable you find important but who was shown to be 2 standard deviations from the mean.

Surely this can't be right? Your choice of test subjects with an existing injury is at odds with your null hypothesis? At best you could only test to see if a poorly regulated piano slows down recovery. To test your null hypothesis you would need to choose healthy test and control subjects?

Joined: Aug 2018
Posts: 6,676
L
6000 Post Club Member
Offline
6000 Post Club Member
L
Joined: Aug 2018
Posts: 6,676
Oh I am sure there are millions of people around with broken fingers, wrist's, thumbs , just because of bad pianos. 👎

Last edited by Lady Bird; 03/30/21 02:26 AM. Reason: missing text
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,539
W
3000 Post Club Member
Offline
3000 Post Club Member
W
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,539
Originally Posted by Lady Bird
I am sure Joe has his methodologies all worked out. He just needs material.

Joe has certainly identified a problem.

If you were to remove the cause of the problem (poor regulation and maintenance of good pianos) you would reduce the frequency of injuries. What, if any, are the types of injury you would eliminate?

Methodology is important. The choice of methodology depends on a precise description of what you want to achieve.

Last edited by Withindale; 03/30/21 02:59 AM.

Ian Russell
Schiedmayer & Soehne, 1925 Model 14, 140cm
Ibach, 1905 F-IV, 235cm
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,581
G
1000 Post Club Member
Online Content
1000 Post Club Member
G
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,581
Originally Posted by Aritempor
Originally Posted by Jethro
If I were to do such a study I would first define my and null hypothesis and the alternative hypothesis. The null hypothesis is that "piano regulation is not a contributing factor to piano injuries" and the alternative hypothesis could be "poorly regulated pianos contribute to injuries in pianists". In science the investigators always try to reject the null hypothesis to accept the alternative hypothesis. Null hypothesis testing is a formal approach to deciding whether a statistical relationship in a sample reflects a real relationship in the population or is just due to chance and you could set that probability levels at say .05 or .001 percent something called a p value. p=.05 or p=.001. This is the real basics of a scientific study. You are essentially proving that the results of your study have a less than .05 or .001 being due to chance.

Then I would want to describe my test subjects and my control group. The test subjects could be a randomly chosen professional pianist or university student who believes they have a piano playing related injury and the control group could be any random professional pianist or university student without an injury. You would have to be selective in your test group looking at things such as age, sex, height, finger length, forearm length, type of injury, severity of injury etc. Same for the control group and after defining these variables you would want to remove anyone who was an outlier, statistically defined as any variable you find important but who was shown to be 2 standard deviations from the mean.

Surely this can't be right? Your choice of test subjects with an existing injury is at odds with your null hypothesis? At best you could only test to see if a poorly regulated piano slows down recovery. To test your null hypothesis you would need to choose healthy test and control subjects?

I think Jethro has it right. If the choice of test subjects was as you propose the null hypothesis would have to be more limited i.e. "piano regulation is not a contributing factor to piano injuries for healthy subjects"

Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,581
G
1000 Post Club Member
Online Content
1000 Post Club Member
G
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,581
Originally Posted by Lady Bird
Oh I am sure there are millions of people around with broken fingers, wrist's, thumbs , just because of bad pianos. 👎

I suspect the injuries of interest are more repetitive strain injuries rather than breaks but, even so, I think you have found the difficulty in that it will I suspect not be possible to have sufficient numbers for the experiment to yield statistically significant results, even if there is a strong correlation between poor regulation and injury.

We have only talked about selection of the subjects so far, not the 'poorly regulated piano' part. Are we going to check each subjects piano to determine if it is 'poorly regulated' and what would the threshold be for that? Maybe we would need pianos graded according to how well they are regulated which might be rather difficult to do objectively, I don't think we could even agree on what might be a sensible measurement for grades of regulation 'wellness'.

Page 4 of 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 9 10

Moderated by  Ken Knapp, Piano World 

Link Copied to Clipboard
What's Hot!!
Pianos - Organs - & Keyboards, Oh My!
My first professionally recorded piece
---------------------
Visit Maine, Meet Mr. Piano World
---------------------
Posting Pictures on the Forums
-------------------
Forums RULES & HELP
-------------------
ADVERTISE on Piano World
(ad)
Pianoteq
Steinway Spiro Layering
(ad)
PianoDisc

PianoDisc
(ad)
Piano Life Saver - Dampp Chaser
Dampp Chaser Piano Life Saver
(ad)
Mason & Hamlin Pianos
New Topics - Multiple Forums
Working while pregnant
by Elsbels - 12/07/21 07:41 AM
Improve sound of Casiotone CT-S1
by Charline - 12/07/21 07:28 AM
Which pedals are compatible with Yamaha P-515?
by Olie222 - 12/07/21 05:32 AM
Constant instrument hopping: the recorder
by meghdad - 12/07/21 04:39 AM
Es920 production stopped??
by playplayplay - 12/07/21 12:07 AM
Download Sheet Music
Virtual Sheet Music - Classical Sheet Music Downloads
Forum Statistics
Forums42
Topics210,425
Posts3,151,166
Members103,545
Most Online15,252
Mar 21st, 2010
Please Support Our Advertisers

Faust Harrison 100+ Steinways

Dampp Chaser Piano Life Saver

 Best of Piano Buyer

PianoTeq Bechstein
Visit our online store for gifts for music lovers

Virtual Sheet Music - Classical Sheet Music Downloads



 
Help keep the forums up and running with a donation, any amount is appreciated!
Or by becoming a Subscribing member! Thank-you.
Donate   Subscribe
 
Our Piano Related Classified Ads
| Dealers | Tuners | Lessons | Movers | Restorations | Pianos For Sale | Sell Your Piano |

Advertise on Piano World
| Subscribe | Piano World | PianoSupplies.com | Advertise on Piano World |
| |Contact | Privacy | Legal | About Us | Site Map | Free Newsletter | MapleStreetMusicShop.com - Our store in Cornish Maine


© copyright 1997 - 2021 Piano World ® all rights reserved
No part of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5