----- Original Message ----- From: "Cy Shuster" <cy.shuster@theshusters.org> To: "Pianotech" <pianotech@ptg.org> Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 8:44 PM Subject: Re: Broadwood barless grand > Next dumb question: why the capo d'astro bar in the first place? > Specifically, why does the string deflection angle have to be so steep at > the front termination of the speaking length, while the deflection angle at > the hitch pin end is not? The presence or absence of the capo tastro bar has nothing to do with the string deflection angle. In theory the capo tastro bar string termination is more efficient because of the added mass. In practice we have achieved what appears to be equal performance from both systems. The weak performance in the upper third of the scale has more to do string scaling and soundboard design than with the front string termination. > > Maybe I have this all wrong: I'm assuming "barless" refers to the capo > d'astro, and perhaps it just means no struts above the plate? The bigger > question is, why was the barless design abandoned? The term "barless" refers to the fact that there are no longitudinal struts used to support the center region of the plate. These plates were of cast steel and were particularly heavy along the bass and treble struts (or bars). It had nothing to do with the lack of the capo tastro bar. Del
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC