Back length tuning

antares antares@euronet.nl
Thu, 1 Dec 2005 17:49:14 +0100


---------------------- multipart/mixed attachment
Hi Ricardo,

The way I see this (hey, I am talking to you!), is to look at the =20
tuning pin as a capstan.
Putting your tuning lever in the direction of the tail, in the same =20
direction as the strings, is of course the only way to tune.
Bending the tuning pin is damaging the capstan and bad for the pin =20
block.
I think it would be better to carefully manipulate the tuning pin =20
into 'the' position, followed by the well know 'blow'.

(they do it in alleys in the Philippines, in New York, in Amsterdam =20
and almost everywhere... they lure a stupid sailor into an alley and =20
then... boom!)
Good for lowering tension too!

*(;; > ))


EAR





On 30-nov-2005, at 23:43, Ric Brekne wrote:

> Hi again folks.
>
> Thanks for the replies guys.  The reason I ask is that I ran into a =20=

> method for doing this that seemed rather brutal to me, and was =20
> curious to see if anyone had run into it.  The fellow called it =20
> <<flexi tuning>>.  On grands he would align his tuning hammer so =20
> that it ran as close to parallell to the strings as he could, pull =20
> up the tension on the string and then literally bang (very hard) on =20=

> the end of the tuning hammer so as to rather violently bend the pin =20=

> towards the speaking length of the string.  This would lower the =20
> string tension without turning the pin the logic went, and thus =20
> lowering the tension also (presumably) on the backlength.  Then he =20
> would re-tune the speaking length.
>
> All this strikes me as a bit odd really.  I suppose that given the =20
> friction of the bridge pins, there might be some degree of =20
> difference between tension for and aft of the bridge without =20
> affecting tuning stability, but I have a hard time imagining very =20
> much.  I have dabbled a bit in <<tuning>> the back scale by using a =20=

> string hook. I'd check the pitch of the backlength before and =20
> after, and then again after tuning the speaking length and never =20
> found I could get the back length to stay where I tried to tune =20
> it.  I cant say I really got into the whole process much as it just =20=

> seemed that with good basic tuning technique the back length =20
> tension should take care of itself.
>
> I guess I will have to try this out a bit more given some of the =20
> comments about clarity in the high treble.  That said, I think I =20
> feel another one of those itches behind my ear coming on :)
>
> Cheers
> RicB
>
> _______________________________________________
> pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives
>

friendly greetings
from
Andr=E9 Oorebeek

R. Vinkeleskade 1-3hg
1071 SN Amsterdam
The Netherlands

tel/fax : 0031-20-6237357
gsm   :  0031-645-492389

www.concertpianoservice.nl



---------------------- multipart/mixed attachment
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: EAR.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 17820 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/5a/05/52/7d/EAR.jpg

---------------------- multipart/mixed attachment

and the stories I hear!
































































---------------------- multipart/mixed attachment--

This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC