---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
Robin
I write this in response to your post listed at the end of this post. Tha=
nks for being transparent.
I've been collecting my thoughts about your post for a few days now. I t=
hink the reason the post failed to get more reaction is that the subject =
was fairly exhausted a few months back I don't know if you caught it. =20
Much of what you said resonated with me in that there seems to be no ver=
ifiable explanation for the phenomena you describe and no consensus eithe=
r. As one who has also been paying close attention to the sounds of the v=
arious multitude of aging pianos the have run thru the shop I have found =
many boards that were completely fractured/and flat or just flat that sou=
nded amazingly good but also I've noted fractured/ or just flat boards b=
oards that looked equally good/ bad that had no chance of resurrection. =20
I confess I sold A Stwy M this week . The 1927 M board had no crown =
and little bearing and after rebuilding action, strings and finish the pi=
ano was sweet, lovely and big sounding . Why the difference? There are a=
s we know a host of determining factors that bear on the mystique of the =
magic sound boards. Crown, down bearing and mass are only one functioning=
model of a working soundboard but I also think just the mass model of a =
board is valid too.I.E Very little compression, no crown and nominal bear=
ing. The tonal results don't lie so I'm at least half a heretic too. That=
being said it would be hard to produce that model with any reliable and =
consistent results. You just fid them where you find them.
On the other side of my experience I have installed many of my own boa=
rds and as others are I too am trying to push the envelope of sustain and=
power. I have achieved a sound with some of my pianos that are I.M H.O. =
as good as any I've ever heard. I've also heard some of the best pianos =
ever and they were Steinways and a few masons from the late 60's and earl=
y seventies( The Horror Years) I believe the stwys' were Sitka spruce boa=
rds with sugar pine ribs and they were to die for. The sustain was truly =
remarkable and the overall tone lively and responsive. The Masons I think=
were eastern spruce.
One example
I had the pleasure of rebuilding a 7 ft. Stwy 1873. I put in gorgeous =
tight grain Sitka board with sugar pine ribs, partial rib crowned nicely =
diaphramized at the edges. Set it up with the pre-stressed method of sett=
ing down bearing , Nice hammers and voicing and Robin the piano was aweso=
me. I know you have to take my word for it but I'm as hard to please as t=
he next guy with ears. My point is that making a sound board is just a wo=
odworking project that incorporates design, quality materials and common =
sense to produce. It's not magic. =20
We still have good wood though it be hard to find. My own personal pre=
ference is Sitka spruce because after using everything else I find that t=
he Sitka exhibits consistent wonderful sustain.
I conclusion the "Magic sound board "is an only partially explainable t=
hing but I'm not a guy who has to quantity everything under a microscope =
I just know if my ears are blessed by the sound coming out a fine piano n=
o matter how old the wood in the soundboard happens to be.
Best---Dale Erwin
=20
----- Original Message -----
From: Robin Hufford
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2001 11:31 AM
To: pianotech@ptg.org
Subject: Confessions of a soundboard heretic
=20
Richard Breckne wrote:
One of the really interesting topics that come up in our discussions
last nite
was this buisness of aging in wood.....
Richard,
With all due respect to the very earnest and intense opinions that
have been expressed previously here on the list as to the deterioration
of soundboards over time I must say that I remain unconvinced that a
long term improvement in the sound produced by many aged boards is out
of the question, in the case, at least, of most high-quality American
pianos. In fact my experience has been essentially to the contrary as
to my own perception of the sound produced by the thousands of these
pianos I have played, tuned, serviced and rebuilt, over the years: in
spite of worn, hard hammers, deteriorated strings and other problems,
many have what I would characterize as a more musical, emotional sound,
with adequate power and ring time throughout the scale. A similiar
improvement is also perceptible to me, in the same fashion, not
always, but most of the time when the comparison is made between many
older or newer violins. I have noticed, however, that there is a
tendency for some of the pianos to have a slightly less ring time in
the last two and a half octaves or so. This is no impediment to me,
however, as to the musical use of the instrument, speaking from my own
experience as a pianist who has practiced literally thousands of hours
and performed in public, both formally and informally, on many
occasions. I would also point out, speaking as a technician, that our
general, overall concept of the sound obtainable from a piano is
conditioned prinicipally from our exposure to the modern pianos built
in the last hundred and twenty years or so in which the problems of
ringtime, volume, and musical timber have been solved in a somewhat
characterisic way. As we all know previous pianos were substantially
different. Those differencies, however, may not have been altogether
negative.
Much of the great literature composed for pianos in the last two
hundred or so years was composed with pianos in mind which exhibited a
substantially different set of attributes of sound. These
characteristics some would argue were inferior as to ringtime and other
characteristics, particularly in the treble, in comparison to the
modern piano - a point I would agree with only in a qualified
manner. But I would certainly agree wholeheartedly that they were
different greatly from more modern instruments. Notwithstanding these
differences, a large corpus of music was composed, as I have said, with
them in mind. This lends strength to the observation that the
differences between, a data set if we had such, of sounds from a
representative sampling of pianos from, say, 1800, and a set from more
modern pianos would not be an impediment to the production and
performance of great music. Having heard a number of what aim for and
are purported to be faithful reconstructions, both in Europe and the
US, I can say that I find these pianos do have a beautiful sound,
perhaps superior as to beauty of timber, in spite of their shorter,
harpsichord-like, ringtime in the treble, their transition problems and
general lack of power. The point I am making is: as pianofortes have
not been an impediment which has precluded the conceptualization and
performance of great music then the older modern-class pianos insofar
as they exhibit after aging some of these characterictics will neither
be such an impediment. I do not however, believe that vast majority of
well rebuilt modern pianos, at least those that have some crown
remaining, and even some that do not, have these deficiencies to a
signifacent degree. Having said this, although rare in my experience, I
have seen some pianos in which my impression was that the soundboard
would, of necessity, have to be replaced, in order to cure some
particular deficiencies in the sound and these deficiencies are almost
always in the treble area.
Taking many of these modern pianos through my shop and rebuilding
them by replacing actions, pinblocks, repairing, shimming, or epoxing
the existing soundboards, recapping bridges, adjusting downbearing,
etc.etc: I have not had in even one case a problem obtaining a
beautifully singing, hi-quality, powerful sound as a result. Contrasting
these instruments with similar ones in which the boards have been
replaced, some of which I have assisted in the replacement of, or to
new pianos, I am forced to confess, at least to my ear, they sound as a
rule better. It is true that there may be slightly less power in an
occasional instrument at a few places in the fifth to sixth octave but
this is not substantial and can almost always be overcome by working the
hammers and string lifting. The tradeoff for this is the tone is
essentially better in a musical sense, at least to my ear and I note
many others making the same observations. I think this is the
experience of many rebuilders. Additionally, one can note the comments
of customers, completely untutored as most of them are in any aspect of
piano technology or acoustics: they spontaneously comment more
favorably on the sound of many older unrebuilt pianos notwithstanding
the evident technical deficiences that have accumulated over time. If
one has the experience to factor out these deficiencies (harshness,
short sustain, etc.) by attributing them to their respective sources and
has experienced first hand what replacement of these parts or techniques
will change in the overall sound then it is a relatively easy matter to
judge the utility of further work My experience of these matters forces
me to conclude that what at one time seemed to be a general consensus
expressed in the Journal that a soundboard with any measurable crown
was rebuildable and did not in and of itself require replacement is, in
fact, the case. Along with this can be found many observations of the
"beautiful, singing, tone" of these older pianos - and, in come cases,
even where the board has flattened altogether.
Whether a soundboard, enduring its own particular, unique ambient
lifestyle, with its own unique, particular characteristics will be
changed over time and thereby change the characteristics of sound
radiating from it, is, I think, something few on this list would
disagree with. The question is, holding constant numerous other
factors, what are these changes and can they possibly be for the
better. My experience and the experience at least as far as I can tell
from many other technicians, musicians, and other people that I am in
contact with, is that indeed that can and they do. Why this is, or can
or cannot be, is another question entirely and nothing expressed
heretofore on this list has been persuasive to me in this regard. This
is not simply a matter of willfullness on my part but rather arises
involuntarily from my experience with the instrument. Donning Flame
Suit and acquiring fire extinguisher.
Robin Hufford RPT
---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/0c/3a/69/58/attachment.htm
---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC