Another 2 cents on pitch

[Erwinspiano@AOL.COM]

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
In a message dated 3/25/2002 8:51:37 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
hufford1@airmail.net writes:


> Subj:Re: Another 2 cents on pitch 
> Date:3/25/2002 8:51:37 PM Pacific Standard Time
> From:<A HREF="mailto:hufford1@airmail.net">hufford1@airmail.net</A>
> Reply-to:<A HREF="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org">pianotech@ptg.org</A>
> To:<A HREF="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org">pianotech@ptg.org</A>
> Sent from the Internet 
> 
>             Hi Robin

           I've not followed this thread but as I've posted before  I 
rebellied a stwy 7 ft from 1870s which had a string scale that without a 
doubt needed A-457 to have enough tension so as to have the speaking voice of 
a concert sounding piano. I ran some lengths and tension analysis on this 
scale and at A-457 the tensions were what you'd expect to find in a normal 
A-440 scale so it is not as if it wasn't designed for it. That being said can 
you imagine pulling the average A-440 Steinway scale up a half step which is 
what A-457 is and expect it to live long and prosper without string breakage. 
I can't, so although I don't doubt for a second what was said to you what 
possible musical purpose would this have served. Either the orchestra or the 
piano would have to transpose keys to play together. The only positive 
outcome would possibly be that the piano would be possibly be louder as it 
approached its breaking strength and sound great,well at least for a while. 
It would definately cut throught the Orchestra better don't you think.
   Someone for the sake of interest needs to crunch the string scale for a B 
or a  D
boost the pitch level and report back on the percentage of breaking strain to 
see if simply jerking the pitch up a half step was a feasible option without 
a completly different string scale.
      Just MY two cents worth as well.>>>>>>>>>Dale Erwin
> 
> David,
>      I was informed, while at the factory in 1987 and by a person whose
> judgment I wholly trusted in this, that the pitch used at Steinway at the
> turn of the century was at two levels.  "Hard" pitch and "soft" pitch.
> Soft pitch was A-440, hard was A-457.  This person had seen the forks that
> had been in use at this time.  I was not informed, and did not think to
> ask, whether this was restricted in application to grands or, whether, it
> applied to both grands and verticals.  I had the impression that these two
> levels of pitch  were applied to a piano without any alterations of
> scaling.
> Regards, Robin Hufford
> 
> David Renaud wrote:
> 
> > What was Steinways pitch in 1901?
> >
> >  I ask as I have a 1901 A2. The tonal difference
> > between a little flat and A440 is very significant
> > in the top end. I'm wondering if these things really
> > were indended to be higher pitched, insomuch as they
> > were built, judged at a higher pitch(?), and
> > designed, manufactured with this end product in mind.
> >
> >                    Dave Renaud
> >
> >
> >


---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/5a/dd/cb/c2/attachment.htm

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--