RIPPEN soundboards

[Delwin D Fandrich]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kristinn Leifsson" <istuner@islandia.is>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: November 06, 2000 2:05 PM
Subject: Re: RIPPEN soundboards


>
> Hi Del,
>
>
>
> > >
> > >
> > > As for one point and two points, I don´t get your point...
> >
> >( -- Those points being -- )
>

I took it to be the points of soundboard support.  Top to bottom, side to
side.

We would encounter this notion from time to time when folks -- usually a
piano technician or a piano salesperson -- would learn that the lower edge
of our soundboard free-floated.  After exclaiming over how nice the bass on
the piano sounded and that they had not heard anything quite that good in a
piano of this size, they would go on to explain to me that I really
shouldn't allow the lower edge of the soundboard to free-float like that.
Soundboards really have to be supported around their entire parameter, you
see, and if I would just tie the soundboard down in the normal fashion, it
would surely sound 'better.'  Actually, we have a great deal of flexibility
in soundboard design, if we're willing to explore them just a bit.  And
shake off some of the ingrained ideas we've been taught, lo, these many
years.

Anyone trying anything even moderately different in this industry -- and
Rippen certainly did do things differently -- is going to run into this
attitude sooner or later.  Even if the evidence of performance indicates
otherwise.

I might mention that we sold Rippen pianos for a time in the U.S. and this
was an aspect of thier performance I spent a bit of time thinking about.
Rudyard is right about the sound.  Though, over all, it was quite good, it
was not as clear as we would have liked.

In this regard Rippen definitly knew what he was doing.  I remain convinced
it was the other aspects of the design -- the stringing scale, the backscale
length and (possibly) the reverse-crowned board -- that gave the piano its
indistinct pitch reference through the bass, not the fact that the bass
section of the soundboard free-floated.  (Notice, I did not include the
laminated soundboard in there.)

Typically, this type of sound results from having very little, or no, energy
at the string's fundament frequency in the tone envelope.  And this lack of
fundamental energy is generally the fault of the things I mentioned.  It can
also be caused in part by the use of a bass bridge cantilever, but I don't
recall that Rippen used them.  There was certainly no reason to do so with
the free-floating soundboard design.

Points clear now???

Regards,

Del


>
> Mais oui, certainement, the points that Mr. Kipling´s namesake pointed out
> below.
>
> > > >In my opinion the sound of the bass is indeed a deep, GRR tone, but
it's
> >not
> > > >clear. The vibration is not marked with an end. A clear note has a
> >vibration
> > > >between 2 solid points, the Rippen note has a vibration between 1
solid
> >and
> > > >1 moving point. It sounds a bit misty. CAPICE?
> > > >
> > > >Rudyard, Rotterdam, Holland
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Kristinn
>