Question for Joe G. re scaling

[David Love]

Joe:

How would you characterize the differences in scaling philosophy that make
it, for example, Steinway versus MH.  And what kind of changes have you seen
that have had the unintended and negative consequences you allude to.  I
have, for example, sent data off to have someone check the scaling of the
piano only to have it come back completely different.  In one case, the
tension had been increased overall by increasing the string diameters from
top to bottom.  To be honest, it made me nervous to make such a change and I
ended up sticking with the original scale design.  Interest to hear you
thoughts as I continue to explore this area.

David Love




----- Original Message -----
From: "Joseph Garrett" <joegarrett@earthlink.net>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: April 30, 2002 9:47 PM
Subject: Hazen's Question re. rescaling/liking/knowing.


> Hazen,
> One of the main factors of Scaling an existing piano, is that the scaler
HAS
> to evaluate what is on the piano, originally, and determine the INTENT of
> the DESIGNER. To arbitrarily change things to get what you think the piano
> should be, without this consideration is ludicrous IMHO. I've seen, WAY
too
> many pianos, scaled in the fashion of another piano to make me barf. (ie a
> Mason & Hamlin scaled to sound like a Steinway). We MUST be cognizant of
the
> intent of the owner of the piano. If the owner bought it because the sound
> pleased him/her, then our job is to simply improve upon the original
design
> w/o losing the intended character/intent of the original piano. This has
> been my credo from the get go and it hasn't failed me yet. (knock on
> spruce!) <G>
> Regards,
> Joe Garrett, RPT, (Oregon)
>
>