Hygrometer

[Farrell]

So they don't have $150 to fix the "exquisite control of humidity and temperature" system, but they would have had the $2,000 to spend on a "full blown DC system"?

I feel we are getting nowhere with this discussion. One more quick try:

 If a well designed, installed and maintained whole room/house/facility climate control system is operated properly, it will maintain a constant climactic environment for all areas of the piano equally. The best designed, installed and operated DC system will likely not quite do that as well, but should be good enough. NEITHER system will work very well if they are not plugged in or are not functioning properly! 

My point in stating this initially, did not address which system was less/more expensive. My home does not have whole house humidity control. I can't afford it. I have an H2 humidistat and 195 watts of DC rods under the soundboard. Pitch never even drifts 1 cent. I believe my piano would be better off with whole room/house humidity control, but that would be more cost than I am willing to spend.

>From "The Piano Quarterly", a publication of Steinway & Sons, "Climate Control and Stabilizing Pitch" by Lou Tasciotti (off the Dampp-Chaser web site): "It would be ideal to stabilize the total environment that the piano is in..." And yes, it does go on to say that is difficult to attain, especially in extreme climates - but the point is that it is a preferred/better goal/ideal.

Terry Farrell, B.S.F., B.S.G., M.S.H, N.A.A.M., N.G.W.A.M., L.P.G., G.A.R.N.G., Assoc. PTG, LDD
  
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Don" <pianotuna@accesscomm.ca>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Monday, September 02, 2002 8:32 AM
Subject: Re: Hygrometer


> Hi Richard,
> 
> Please notice the word *local* as in location. Where I live the only
> practical way to achieve "perfect" control on an "art gallery" level is to
> have three layers. A large building with an outer shell where there is
> little attempt to control humidity except to keep it low enough to prevent
> damage to outside walls, then a "buffer zone" where humidity is kept
> somewhat higher, and finally a super controlled area where the delicate
> object of arts are kept. 
> 
> If we accept that building costs are say $20.00 per square foot (a
> ridiculously low price) and that a full blown DC system costs $2000.00 (a
> ridiculously high price) one can certainly see the "economics" of this
> approach compared to the box within a box within a box.
> 
> In any event this "three layer approach" is the exact situation that our
> local gallery has. They have a small grand piano. It is rarely able to
> survive a twenty-four hour period where it can stand in tune due to
> humidity changes.
> 
> One of our local music schools has a similar structure--but with a very
> small recital hall. The room had exquisite control of humidity and
> temperature. One summer the humidity controller failed. There was no money
> in the budget (a paltry sum of $150.00 was needed) Of course that winter,
> the soundboard on the instrument cracked and all the hammer shanks warped. 
> 
> So I repeat my claim. Give me a "perfect" room in the "real world", and
> I'll add a "perfect" DC system in my local, and improve on the stability of
> the instrument.
> 
> 
> 
> At 09:38 AM 9/2/02 +0200, you wrote:
> >Don wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Terry,
> >>
> >> No a room/house/facility is *not* better because they always in my local
> >> fail to provide good enough humidity control, because of budget
> >> restrictions. Give me a facility that is nearly perfect--and I'll add a
> >> well equipped properly installed damppchaser and improve on stability.
> >>
> >
> >Grin... yet another redefinition of the problem / situation... Of course a
> >room facility is useless if its turned off. I think Terry was asking (and I
> >tend to agree) whether or not a well functioning humidiy room system (that
> >will say one that does not suffer the problems of budjet restrictions or
> >other such hindrances) is better then a likewise well functioning DC.
> >
> >One could just as easily the DC is worse because people keep forgetting to
> >fill  them up, or simply unplug them... but thats not the point.
> >
> >All things being equal thus,,,,,  which is better ??? I would say a well
> >controlled room would be better, hands down.
> >
> >JMHO
> >
> >
> >--
> >Richard Brekne
> >RPT, N.P.T.F.
> >UiB, Bergen, Norway
> >mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no
> >http://home.broadpark.no/~rbrekne/ricmain.html
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> Regards,
> Don Rose, B.Mus., A.M.U.S., A.MUS., R.M.T., R.P.T.
> 
> mailto:pianotuna@accesscomm.ca
> 
> http://us.geocities.com/drpt1948/
> 
> 3004 Grant Rd.
> REGINA, SK
> S4S 5G7
> 306-352-3620 or 1-888-29t-uner