Stein-D rolled bridge

[Ron Nossaman]

>    Approx. 3 year old Steinway D
>    Appears to have a severely rolled bridge.

No such thing. There's improper setup, and soundboard failure.


> Measurements.......
>   With a dial gauge I measure plus 10 at the back
> and 0 at the front at about D4. At about D5 0 bearing.
> Most readings are lower at the front then back
> throughout.
> 
>   So I call in a friend with a proper bubble gauge who
> gets results consistent with mine. At D4 plus 24 at
> back, negative 12 front. 

So that's 1.3° at the back, and -0.7° at the front? That's a pretty 
severe difference. Was the overall bearing then about 0.6° positive 
at D-4?


>   Of added significance may be that the bass bridge
> has roll; Negative 15 front, on second highest bass
> bridge note.

That's nearly a degree of negative front bearing. Pretty extreme.


>   What motivated me to measure was buzzing back scale
> on the chrome plates, as if the rear of the bridge
> had lifted enough to eliminate good contact with the
> plate. 

Hard to believe that's possible. I'd sure take more bearing and 
crown measurements (all over).


Termination points do not stay seated, more
> buzzing has appeared over the winter.

That's a clue that says soundboard.


>   There is still some crown on the board, as seen
> by a stretched string, but the bridge has rolled
> forward.

Crown where, at D4? The bass? The killer octave? At the bridge, 
behind the bridge, overall?


> Questions
> 
>    This is a relatively new piano, so a warranter
> issue. 
> What should be done?

Someone needs to take a series of more comprehensive measurements of 
soundboard crown and string bearing in all accessible areas of the 
scale to get a clear idea of what is there.


> What is likely to be suggested?

Probably voicing.


> What arguments can be had against half measures?

None, unless you have measurements clearly and logically indicating 
what the problem actually is.


>    If they suggest just recapping the bridges.
> They should do it; correct?

I would say so, yes. They'll first be aghast that such a thing has 
come up, since in the entire history of the company, this will be 
the first time they have ever heard such a complaint. Then, they 
will want to send another tech out to fix what they will assume to 
be a simple field repair. Only when this fails, will they consider 
any real corrective action. I've passed up a lot of income through 
the years refusing to do band-aid warranty work on pianos that 
wasn't indicated by what I had already found the problem to be. 
(technically known as faking it, and lying to the customer about it) 
If offered the opportunity, you get to decide for yourself if you 
want to take the money and run, or hold out for a real fix. I'd at 
least want to try to do it right.


> Would such a solution be a band aid to a more serious
> soundboard problem?

I don't see how it could be anything else. Take those more 
comprehensive crown and bearing measurements and put together a 
clearer picture of what is currently there, and the problem will at 
least be more accurately defined. That alone will limit the possible 
options for remedial attack.

Ron N