Moving Damper Guide Rails

[Farrell]

> Given all that.... do you "put" the Steinway name and decal back the way you
> found it ? Not that I object to basically totally re-designing the
> instrument.... but if you do.... how do you justify calling it a Steinway ?....
> It's easily as much a Trout by then eh ?

I thought we just went through all that a while back?

A 1970 Ford Mustang that has TRW 12:1 pistons, a stroked crank, a Wieand hi-rise aluminum manifold, a Holley 850 cfm double pumper dual feed carburetor, Hooker headers, Muncie wide ratio transmission, balanced driveshaft, 4.88 rear end gears, etc., etc., etc. is still a Ford Mustang.

I think the only time we need consider a need for changing the name on a rewhatevered object is if it goes into full-scale remanufacturing to a set design and available at some level of large scale. Perhaps like the Shelby Mustang. Obviously there is some grey area there. And yes, if one were selling a significantly modified thingee, I feel it would be appropriate to tell of the modifications - but if it had a manufacturers sticker on it before, I think generally it is A-ok to put the sticker back. 

Even Andre Bolduc who says not to change a thing - doesn't he cut a curve into his soundboard ribs? Gee wizz, isn't that kinda like playing God?

IMHO, all this is much ado about nothing.

Terry Farrell
  
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Richard Brekne" <Richard.Brekne@grieg.uib.no>
To: "Pianotech" <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 4:02 PM
Subject: Re: Moving Damper Guide Rails


> 
> 
> Brian Trout wrote:
> 
> > Hi Richard,
> >
> > Several things I differ with...
> >
> > 1) "Put it back the way you found it."
> > Maybe that's the way I did my very first jobs, but it didn't take long to
> > grow outta that one.  I feel like part of what I do in "rewhatevering" is to
> > make it better than it was.   There are some jobs, however, especially with
> > Steinway pianos, where the customer will insist that it be "put back the way
> > it would have originally been built".  I'd really rather try to do better
> > than that if I have anything to say about it.  Given my choice, I do not
> > generally leave the bass bridge where it was or the scaling the same, leave
> > the bridge notching for some angle other than 90 deg to the string, or
> > compression crown a soundboard...
> >
> 
> Given all that.... do you "put" the Steinway name and decal back the way you
> found it ? Not that I object to basically totally re-designing the
> instrument.... but if you do.... how do you justify calling it a Steinway ?....
> It's easily as much a Trout by then eh ?
> 
> 
> >
> > 2) The general idea that "the piano makers of old knew much more than we
> > know and we should respect their work by restoring as it was."  Although I
> > will admit that some of the trial and error that took place did, on
> > occasion, result in pleasant sounding pianos, I believe that we can do
> > better than "hit and miss"... or "put it back as was."
> 
> No problem with this really.... tho I dont think we should take it for granted
> that the ancient ones simply played a game of hit and miss. Theirs what a
> different world... and we are not nearly as familiar with that as perhaps we'd
> like to think.
> 
> >
> > 3) The general idea that "strings of different length within the same unison
> > add color and body to the tone."  Some may have believed that.  Some may
> > still believe that.  I don't particularly like the effect that it has on the
> > overall tone of the piano.  To my ear, it adds a harshness, a sharpness that
> > is not pleasant.  I like smooth and mellow.  Others may disagree.  It's my
> > preference, which I would not wish to impose on anyone.
> 
>  That,,,, was the jist of my last post. I dont like the effect either when it
> comes down to it. But then I dont like tuning unisions ever so slightly out of
> tune either. But I know several fine musicians that like that kind of sound... I
> know several who like the sound of a certain amount of falseness in general...
> false beats, wangyness... the works.. to them... this brings life to an
> instrument. Thats cool... what ever turns you on... or what ?  This is another
> reason why I think we need to be a bit carefull about what we define as
> "better".
> 
> > Just a few random thoughts to throw out.  Don't know if that answers your
> > question or not, Richard.  I'm sure if you're going to Dallas in July, we'll
> > have lots of new input to soak up in Del's class!  :-)  I do like Del's
> > class.  We get to think outta the box.
> 
> Wont be making Dallas, and Chicago last year was not a dooer either. The Home
> Security Service (HSS) makes it waaaayyy to much a pain in the patootey for me
> to travel to the US for the time being. And besides... I'd like to spend some
> time and energy getting Del to do a class at one of our conventions. We had
> great fun with David Stanwood and Roger Jolly this past October. Perhaps in 2004
> I'll do another US trip and take in a convention. They are great fun and I enjoy
> seeing you folks....even if it is for just a few hours in the rush.
> 
> >
> > Take care,
> >
> > Brian
> 
> Likewise !
> RicB
> 
> --
> Richard Brekne
> RPT, N.P.T.F.
> UiB, Bergen, Norway
> mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no
> http://home.broadpark.no/~rbrekne/ricmain.html
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives