Hello List This "caveat emptor" business is NOT something I would expect to be hurled at me by such a manufacturer as S&S. I bought a second hand year old Ford nearly two years ago. There is a "three year warranty" from Ford still in force and when I discovered rust on two of the doors Ford immediately called in the car, replaced the doors, sprayed in the paint-work, cleaned and polished the car and gave me a "courtesy car" whilst it was done (one week) as well. No cost to me. Now that is what I call committment. When we had trouble with a Grotrian Steinweg small Concert Grand, Grotrians took the piano back to Germany, fixed the problem to our satisfaction and supplied us with a "courtesy piano" whilst this was done. Again at no cost. Do we not expect the same from S&S - particularly where one of their "flag-ship" instruments is concerned? Or am I not reading this "posting" correctly? Regards from a beautiful sunset over the Sussex Downs Village. Michael G.(UK) ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Love" <davidlovepianos@comcast.net> To: "'Pianotech'" <pianotech@ptg.org> Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2005 3:06 PM Subject: RE: Stienway(Steinway) d-rolled bridge saga- report >I think you take it for what it is. The company accepts a wide range of > "performance" out of its pianos. That goes for soundboards and tone as > well > as actions. It may simply be that for the process and materials they use > and the quality control they currently employ, they have found that they > must accept a certain degree of variation in, in this case, residual > bearing, crown, and, ultimately, tone. Whether the problem weighs in more > on the process itself, is more of a skilled labor issue, or one of > antiquated tooling is of interest to us (and should be to them), but the > bottom line is that, if and when purchasing a piano from this company, one > needs to be aware of how wide the range of acceptable is from them and > then > proceed with caution. Unfortunately (or fortunately), for most piano > buyers, these problems go mostly unnoticed. When and if this little known > part of their reputation starts to become more known and it starts to > effect > sales, then it is likely you will see some change. Until then, caveat > emptor. > > David Love > davidlovepianos@comcast.net > > -----Original Message----- > From: pianotech-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org] On > Behalf > Of David Skolnik > Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2005 3:40 AM > To: Pianotech > Subject: Re: Stienway(Steinway) d-rolled bridge saga- report > > Horace and all - > > I just had occasion to read this thread. I need to leave for an early > tuning (Steinway D, in fact), so I can't afford the tortured sessions it > usually takes me to excrete even a few sentences. Perhaps I'll try later > this evening. I am, however, dismayed that, among other things, the > manufacturers response seems to elicit only mild consternation on the part > of list responders. I too have gotten similar response, though not > written, over the years. Why is there not outrage on this list over this > situation? Are we still so afraid of the manufactures long reach and > memory? I am. But what would the technical community's response be if > they > presented such claims at a class at a convention, or in their promotional > material? What is a warrantee worth? David R has made this > public. Assuming his assessment and observations are correct, what does > it > mean for any of us (or our clients) if we cannot see this situation > successfully resolved? > > David Skolnik > > > > At 12:02 PM 7/8/2005 -0700, you wrote: > >>Dave, et al, >> >>I was wondering who would speak up on this. Seeing that no one else has, >>and there seems to be some continuing interest, here are some thoughts: >> >> - What you are seeing is not all that uncommon. It is primarily, but >> certainly not exclusively, found on larger instruments. S&S Ds and Bs in >> particular are susceptible. While there are ways in which the problems >> you describe can sometimes be ameliorated temporarily, the correct fix >> is, of course, a new board. >> >> - This goes largely, but not exclusively co-equally to the much-debated >> method of construction used, changes made in those methods over time >> (beginning in the mid-1950s, and pretty much completed during the later >> 1980s/early 1990s), and, like it or not, the combined problems faced by >> all piano makers of decreasing quality both as to raw materials and labor > pool. >> >> - The letter you received from the person at S&S is a paraphrase of what >> various folks in various positions there have been saying for at least >> the last 40 years about this and similar issues. I have copies of >> similar correspondence and/or notes from conversations relating to >> service dating back to the mid-1960s buried someplace about this kind of > thing. >> >> - Do not count on S&S to fully acknowledge the problem. Even if they >> do, you cannot be sure of how the repairs (if in fact, any are authorized >> at all) will be carried out. In the event that they do, I would urge you >> to take exceptionally careful measurements of everything from deck height >> (of both the plate and the under side of the pin block) to speaking >> length; and then make sure to document everything with appallingly anal >> clarity. >> >> - FWIW, it may well be that you simply wind up having to live with the >> beast. If that turns out to be the case, encourage the owners to start >> planning now on having the board (and, in all likelihood, the block) >> replaced sooner rather than later. And, have that work done elsewhere. >> >>Best regards. >> >>Horace >> >>At 05:07 PM 7/4/2005, you wrote: >>>Esteemed list >>> >>> I have taken my time following this up as I ponder >>>what attitude to take. For new readers...to review.... >>>bridge is lower on speaking side then backscale side >>>by as much as 20 thou. over much of this new D >>>Steinway.. including the bass bridge. The result is >>>strings that will not stay seated, and various buzzing >>>off the backscale. It is severe enough in at least one >>>place the back of the bridge is highenough that there >>>is no pressure on the backscale plate before the hitch >>>pin and the string will buzz on the plate unless held >>>down to the plate or muted. >>> >>> From previous posts I understand bridges do >>>not roll so much as soundboards in front of the >>>bridges may collapse. Also it was suggested by at >>>least one person that the piano was built this way. >>> >>> I have a response from Stienway, and have >>>respectfuly taken off the name of the person >>>writing for the moment. They are coming from NY >>>to see this piano and in light of the response >>>I hope for more feedback. They obviously wish to >>>manage the problem and leave it alone. I can not >>>see strings staying seated in its current condition. >>>String seating and hammer mating is at present, in >>>my opinion, a waste of time. >>> >>> Here it is......... >>> >>>------------------------------------------------- >>>Hello David, >>> >>>First, thank you for your very complete letter. Your >>>comments are very helpful in trying to assess any >>>possible problems with this piano. >>> >>>As to the excess glue, you are correct that this is >>>simply glue squeeze-out that should have been cleaned >>>up in the manufacturing of the piano. >>>It is sometimes difficult to see this at the belly >>>rail but, as you have done, should be removed to >>>prevent possible buzzes in the future. >>> >>>Concerning the bridge/downbearing, let's keep an eye >>>on this if the buzzes have been eliminated for the >>>time being. While it presents a situation to >>>keep an eye on, I do not want to make an immediate >>>pronouncement that there is something wrong there. The >>>primary thing that manufacturers look for is >>>the total composite bearing on the front and back >>>combined. This should, of course, be a positive >>>bearing. Theoretically, there should be positive front >>>and back bearing. However, pianos seldom conform to >>>the theoretically correct. I have taken many bearing >>>measurements - on both good sounding and >>>not-so-good sounding pianos. Some of the best sounding >>>pianos have exhibited the measurements you describe >>>below while some of the lesser sounding pianos >>>are textbook perfect. The downward forces of the >>>strings over the bridges (anywhere from 800 - 1100 lbs >>>of force) cause each piano to develop its own >>>unique shape. Sometimes that "settling" can be >>>measured to exhibit what we technicians commonly cause >>>bridge roll. That in itself is not a great cause >>>for concern but rather a sign that we need to monitor >>>this in case tonal issues arise consistently with a >>>piano. >>> >>>In my experience, seating and leveling the strings, >>>hammer filing, voicing meticulously, hammer spacing, >>>and making sure the bridge pins are seated in >>>the bridges alleviate any tonal problems 98% of the >>>time. You MAY have one of the "2% pianos" there but >>>let's wait and see if problems develop again >>>before we determine a course of action. >>> >>>Again, thanks for your very detailed and thoughtful >>>note. And please call or contact me if I can be of >>>service on any issues or questions you have. >>> >>>---------------------------------------------------- >>>Some of my Original Letter to Stienway........ >>>------------------------------------------------- >>>Hello >>> >>> Dave Renaud here, Ottawa-Gatineau, Canada. >>> >>> One of my clients is the Quebec Conservatory in >>>Gatineau Quebec. >>> >>> They have a new D you are likely aware of. It >>>was in ......cut............... >>> >>> I have a few observations that should be >>>investigated. >>> >>>Minor...... There were very large 2-3 inch long >>>shards of glue where the soundboard meets the belly >>>rail. Some of these thin shards from oozing glue >>>(I saved some, could take a pic.), were lightly >>>touching/buzzing against the board. I cleaned this up, >>> It eliminated some buzzes and did take time to >>>troubleshoot.........when all else was eliminated, I >>>thought it had to be the glue joint along the rim. >>> >>>Major...... The bearing on the back of the bridges >>>is high, the bearing on the front(speaking side) >>>much lower. As much as 20 at the back and 0 at the >>>front. This is all over, on both the treble , and bass >>>bridge. I was motivated to measure because a buzz on >>>the backscale could not be eliminated without pushing >>>the string down on the backsacle plate. This string >>>would not seat on the plate due 0 bearing over the >>>plate, This lead be to wonder if Perhaps the back of >>>the bridge was high. It is, and the front is >>>low, string travelling downhill to the speaking >>>length. >>> >>>These measurements were made with a Lowell gauge. >>> >>>I followed up by having xxxx from xxx measure with a >>>bubble gauge. He had negative measuments on the bridge >>>cap angle all over the piano as much as negative 18 in >>>places. I then had xxxxx look at it and confirm the >>>same thing. >>> >>> The strings should travel "uphill" to its >>>termination point at the speaking length. >>>They are travelling downhill to the speaking length. >>> >>> Marcel came down from Quebec city, and spent a day >>>seating and mating strings, did a wonderful job, and >>>the piano was much better. >>> >>> With the negative slop to the bridge nothing will >>>stay seated for long. >>> >>> What believe has happened with this piano is >>>technicians arriving for a day, with a program >>>in mind to treat normal problems. Indeed, they find >>>strings that need seating, and hammers that need >>>mating....normal.....and proceed to fix it. >>> >>> But on this piano, the poor seating, and string >>>mating is NOT because it was neglected, or not >>>maintained properly, and not because needs proper >>>concert service. We can do that. It is a recurring >>>symptom of the negative bridge cap angle. >>> >>> The opinion that I am hearing suggested from techs >>>is the soundboard at the front of the bridge may have >>>collapsed somewhat. Hmmm...that belly rail that >>>should supports the crown and all those oozing glue >>>shards at that very joint. Could this mean something >>>related. What does those shards suggest in the >>>manufacturing process. Just too much glue? not >>>securely glued down at the belly normally? Just not >>>cleaned up? Just thinking out loud ...any thoughts >>>here. >>> If I am missing something here I am very >>>interested in understanding how this can be. >>>Your thoughts, observations, and suggested solutions >>>will be of great interest to me. >>> At this point I believe I have observe and >>>diagnosed >>>something everyone else has missed. Not that others >>>were in any way delinquent, they did fine fine >>>work, but were I think on a schedule, a program to >>>follow, and seeing the symptoms went straight to work >>>without sufficient "why is this." I happen to spent a >>>great deal of time in front of this instrument >>>tuning and pondering over recurring buzzes that >>>motivated me to look to the bridges,and check those >>>glue joints. >>> >>> I hope this has been helpful >>> >>> If I could make further measument charts, but I >>>think you see what is here. >>> If I can be of help, please ask away. >>> >>> >>> David Renaud >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>__________________________________________________ >>>Do You Yahoo!? >>>Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >>>http://mail.yahoo.com >>>_______________________________________________ >>>pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives >> >>_______________________________________________ >>pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives > > > _______________________________________________ > pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives > > >
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC