[CAUT] [Files] Re: Nossaman D

Ron Nossaman rnossaman@cox.net
Wed, 24 Aug 2005 13:18:23 -0500


>> Separating the bridges and adding the transition brought the whole  
>> bottom half of the scale to life. The low tenor and low bass being  no 
>> longer clamped to one another by a ring bridge construction lets  them 
>> move separately to good effect.
>>
> 
> Will this have a negative effect on tuning stability in the low  tenor?

The opposite, in my experience. Break% went from average 36% to 
average 52% in the first five low tenor unisons. That should help 
stability there. The original 36% break was high enough that it 
shouldn't have been that reactive anyway. Those pianos with break% 
in the mid twenty% and lower are the real nightmares. Maybe Dave 
will report how it does after it settles in some.


>> Among the deleted features were the tuned rear duplexes...
> 
> 
> Just curious as to why, and why you installed the (er, Baldwin-esque)  
> roll pins.  Seems like they are the source of a lot of very unmusical  
> noise on the Baldwins, but maybe that's just my perception.

I like the long back scale and pivoting hitch termination that lets 
the board move easier. The noise produced by long untuned back 
lengths bothers some, and not others. I'm one of the nots. I'm of a 
mind that most tuned rear duplexes are too short to be of much value 
at best.

Ron N

This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC