This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment <0:) Joe Goss imatunr@srvinet.com www.mothergoosetools.com ----- Original Message -----=20 From: David Skolnik=20 To: pianotech@ptg.org=20 Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2002 10:07 AM Subject: Re: Case separation or delamination question Hi Terry - At 08:52 AM 03/30/2002 -0500, you wrote: This is a long post about rim delamination. Actually, it only seems long, most likely because I used the shorter = line width that people seem to prefer, and because I use too many = commas. I also try to save space by not using smiley faces, but I think = them a lot. Also my apology took up a few lines. If I understand you correctly, you are concerned that the rim = delamination is causing the tonal deficiencies. That WAS the point of my original question. By the time of the post to = which you responded I was trying to confirm and clarify my understanding = of what Del had said, which, overall, left me feeling that this might = not be as big an issue as I had first thought. I offered as little = information as I thought was necessary to focus on that question, but, = judging from a few of your subsequent comments, that may not have been = adequate. I'm no rim professional, but I suspect all you need to do with this = rim is to flip the piano over and fill the little rascal gap with West = System epoxy.=20 I haven't the means to simply flip this 8' sucker over. (Good thing = it's only 85 notes) Even if it hadn't just been rebuilt, I would want = to know that it was likely necessary before I undertook the expense. Ok, so now you have the rim taken care of. Time to consider the = cause of the tonal deficiencies. You have a flat board with a dead = treble. You mention the piano was rebuilt. New soundboard? Yes Who made = the soundboard? Not relevant, other than to say it was done by = experienced rebuilder Original 119 year old Steinway soundboard? = Yikes! If that is the case, I would consider focusing on the need for a = new soundboard. (This kinda sounds like the situation to me!) No The question for me was whether there was any reason to suspect that = the delamination would likely have contributed to the apparent lack of = crown in a newly installed board. Fully evaluate crown and downbearing over the entire soundboard to = better understand your soundboard's condition. Terry, I'm just curious. How would you go about measuring the = downbearing? (:-!) See, I can't seem to get a good smiley (;-(=20 David Skolnik =20 ----- Original Message -----=20 From: "David Skolnik" <skolnik@attglobal.net> To: <pianotech@ptg.org> Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2002 1:09 AM Subject: Re: Case separation or delamination question > Thanks Del & Zen for your replies. First, a bit of an apology. I = cross=20 > posted to the CAUT list because I suspected that there are some = people who=20 > are on there exclusively, remembering afterwards that I, myself = have=20 > sometimes found it confusing when the same thread subject is being = carried=20 > on simultaneously on both lists, sometimes with cross posting, and = at other=20 > times on only one or the other. I considered forwarding the CAUT = responses=20 > to this list & visa versa, but suspect that will just make things = worse,=20 > so, for now, if you're interested, there are some other responses = on the=20 > other list as well. >=20 > The piano in question is an old Steinway C (?) 85 note from about=20 > 1883. (There was either a recent posting or it was on someone's = web site=20 > that I saw an excellent listing of old models and dates. I can't = find it=20 > at the moment). The delamination between inner and outer rims = goes=20 > completely around the perimeter. The visible gapping is generally = from 1=20 > to 2mm. I only had a flat steel handled upright mute (.5mm or = .020") to=20 > use as a feeler gauge & it tended to insert between 1 to 2 inches = throughout. >=20 > The piano was recently rebuilt (within the last year and a half). = There=20 > have been significant tonal deficiencies, especially in the 5th = and 6th=20 > 8ve. From the 7th rib up there is no apparent crown. I didn't = notice the=20 > delamination when the piano first came back, but, in spite of a = few months=20 > out of the year of rather low humidity (20%), I doubt that such a = degree of=20 > separation would have happened in such a short time. >=20 > The main question for me is, what design parameters are impacted, = and to=20 > what degree, when there exists a significant amount of inner rim = -outer rim=20 > separation of a unified rim design. >=20 > At 09:35 AM 03/29/2002 -0800, Del wrote: (Edited) >=20 > >Rim delaminations are usually not a matter of great concern--at = least not > >structurally--unless the delamination is evident for some = considerable > >distance or the affected area is expanding. >=20 > >There is far less stress > >on piano rims than is commonly thought. >=20 > What are the sources of stress in a single rim construction? The = initial=20 > bending creates the classic tension/compression stress. Spreading = the arms=20 > to fit the pinblock relaxes some of that stress, but stresses the = cured=20 > glue joints. Some stress is transferred from the strung plate. and = perhaps=20 > some outward stress from the compression of the soundboard. Some = of the=20 > stress is internal, some imposed. Would the acoustical properties = of the=20 > rim change over time, as the internal stress dissipates? >=20 > >With the now much more common style of rim construction in which = the piano > >is basically built on a separate inner rim with the outer rim = being added > >down the line somewhere, the most common problem involves getting = the joint > >between two rims just right. >=20 > >Structurally and acoustically there is no advantage to either = style of rim > >construction as long as each process is done reasonably well. A = glue joint > >is a glue joint and it matters not whether the entire rim is = formed in one > >pressing or in two pressings that are later glued together. = Having worked > >with both I now have a preference for the so-called two-piece rim > >construction. The resulting rim is at least as strong and the = piano is much > >easier to build accurately. >=20 > So, what purpose does the outer rim serve, in a Steinway? Would = you=20 > suspect any discernable difference between a Steinway built in the = > traditional manner and one constructed with a 2 part rim? For = that matter,=20 > when did Steinway begin unified rim construction? >=20 > >In most cases I wouldn't be overly concerned about the small = areas of veneer > >delaminating often found in otherwise serviceable pianos. Keep an = eye on the > >area involved but, unless the delaminating is spreading, it's = probably not > >going to cause any real problems. >=20 > >As part of the rebuilding/remanufacturing process the rim should = be examined > >for potential structural problems. If, during this examination, = any rim > >delaminating is found the gaps are filled with epoxy. >=20 > In an older instrument such as the one I have described, I would = assume=20 > that most, if not all of the original internal tension has = relaxed. Unless=20 > the outer rim contributes to rigidity of the soundboard mounting, = affecting=20 > crown and energy reflection, the only reasons I can see = addressing rim=20 > separation would be either cosmetic, to prevent potential = transient=20 > vibrations, or to keep it from getting worse. Have I = misunderstood or=20 > misstated your position, or does this correctly reflect your = thoughts? >=20 > Thanks - >=20 > David Skolnik >=20 >=20 >=20 ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/f9/7e/96/ee/attachment.htm ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC