Scale design question

[Delwin D Fandrich]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Vanderhoofven" <dkvander@joplin.com>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: March 31, 2001 9:29 PM
Subject: Scale design question


> I have noticed recently that the Baldwin 243 studio, the Boston UP-118S
> studio, the George Steck studio, the Steinway 45 studio, a Kawai studio
> (model number unkown) and the Yamaha P-22 (if I remember correctly) all
> have the first plain steel wire on the treble bridge starting at note D#3.
>
> There are several other sizes of pianos that have similarities in scale
> design.  For instance the Steinway D and several other large grands have
> the lowest plain steel wire at note F2.
>
> Is there a reason for having these similarites in the scale design?  Did
> these companies all copy the same design?  Or is it just because for a
> given size of piano there is an ideal maximum string length and diameter
> for the lowest plain steel string?
>
> Thanks!
> David A. Vanderhoofven
----------------------------------------------------------

I can't speak for the others, but in the Baldwin 243 studio -- at least as I
redesigned it in the mid 1980s should make the transition between tri-chord
plain steel wires to bi-chord wrapped wires between F-33 and E-32.

F-33 in this piano is only about 812 mm (approx. 32.0") long. This is very
short for a steel string. In this scale it is a #21 wire (0.047" or approx.
1.2 mm) and still has only 158 lbs (approx. 71.7 kgf) of tension. While I
would normally consider this tension to be quite adequate in a piano of this
size, the way the original tenor bridge was laid out the tensions just an
octave or so above this were averaging upwards of 200 lbs (approx. 90.8
kgf). My mission -- which I chose to accept -- was to make the scaling less
bad without spending any money. This precluded making any substantial
changes to the plate. Things like relocating the V-bar were out of the
question.

To go any lower with plain steel wires in a scale this short would have
required using an even thicker -- more massive -- wire, something I didn't
want to do. It makes the tuning transition from plain steel to bi-chord
wrapped even worse than normal and they generally sound pretty tubby.

This piano has the bass-tenor break at C-28/C#29. I don't know why this
crossover point was originally chose. It would not have been my choice in a
piano of this size. I do know we weren't going to change it during the
redesign.

To some extent there will be similarities in the design of pianos of similar
size because of the dictates of what has been considered 'good scaling.'
There is also a great deal of copying going on so that the mistakes of one
design get passed on along with its strengths. In small scales this has
mostly been mistakes. I don't know of any 'good' scale designs (in my
opinion, of course) currently being produced in small pianos, either small
verticals (say below 115 cm, or 45+ inches) or small grands (say shorter
than 160 cm, or 5' 3"). .

And who ever said -- more properly, who ever proved, that E-20/F-21 was the
best place to cross over on a large scale such as those typically found in
our so-called concert pianos of today? (So-called because a piano of any
size used in a concert becomes a concert piano. Some of the most enjoyable
concerts I have attended used pianos in the 200 to 225 cm (6' 7" to 7' 5")
range and were performed in halls seating only 200 to 250 people.)

Del