The debate rages (CCvRC) Was "Sorry!"

[gordon stelter]

Like I said: all I'm "sure" of is that we're "missing
something". These 4 magnificent pianos have all been
in Georgia for over 100 years, possibly the lousiest
place in America for pianos, barring Florida and
Hawaii. The humidity can hover at 95% for a  month,
then go to 25% in winter, with daily temperature
swings of up to 40 degrees F.   All have FAT, WIDE,
SHALLOW ribs, ALL remain extremely responsive. All the
theories about rib-crowned boards sound good to me,
but, according to the experts here, shouldn't these
boards be total trash by now? 
     I'm going to try to tell if there is some
rib-crowning in these things.
     Thumper

--- David Love <davidlovepianos@comcast.net> wrote:

> Not to start something but it seems to me there are
> two issues.  One is how
> to build a board where there is a fairly good chance
> that what you predict
> will happen in terms of crown, stiffness, etc., in
> fact, happens.  Here I
> think the RC&S boards have a clear advantage.  The
> other separate issue is
> what it is that you are aiming for.  Subsumed under
> the heading of RC&S
> boards are all kinds of possibilities in terms of
> number and array of the
> ribs, amount of crown in the ribs, height, spacing,
> panel grain angle,
> cutoffs, fish, scale design, etc., etc.,.  Each
> combination will produce its
> own sound.  As I see it, the beauty of the RC&S
> system is that it allows you
> to tweak these other specs and not be as concerned
> with the crowing process
> itself and whether or not it produces fundamental
> structural integrity
> within a much narrower range.  Only when you have a
> system of crowning the
> board that is reliable can you remove reliability as
> a  variable a realistic
> chance of exploring all the other options.  
> 
> David Love
> davidlovepianos@comcast.net 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pianotech-bounces@ptg.org
> [mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org] On Behalf
> Of Ric Brekne
> Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 10:44 AM
> To: pianotech
> Subject: SORRY! ( Was meant to be private. )
> 
> Grin... Hi Thumpy..  I see you put your foot ...
> er.. tail in it.
> 
> As one of our more famous, if not equally popular,
> presidents of the 
> past used to say... "Let me say this about that !"
> 
> Before you accept or reject the superiority of RC&S
> boards over any 
> other it might be a good idea to define that
> superiority a bit more 
> closely.  Its all to easy to mix quantifiable,
> measureable things with 
> what can only fall into the domain of pure taste.  I
> have to agree on 
> the point that some of the older quality instruments
> one comes across 
> still yeild a wonderful warm and full bodied tone. 
> Not the same kind of 
> full bodied a new high quality built instrument
> displays... but 
> wonderfull in its own right.  As far as I know there
> is simply no real 
> data available of any sort to confirm or reject that
> this has anything 
> at all to do with how the boards were assembled.  My
> own thinking goes 
> along the lines of a combination of reasonably well
> housed (climate 
> wise) over many years, reasonably well kept and a
> healthy portion of 
> luck... on top of being pretty well built to begin
> with.
> 
> I think its safe to say that RC&S boards are more
> predictable in terms 
> of living up to their expectations... and probably
> even lend them selves 
> well to design changes for customizing the sound
> picture that results as 
> Nossaman alluded to the other day. They seem to have
> much going for them 
> in terms of structual integrity over time, and they
> seem to pretty much 
> eliminate the so called killer octave syndrom.   No
> doubt we can list up 
> several superiority items.
> 
> On the other hand... there are other items that line
> up more along the 
> lines of  "differences" in the neutral sense of the
> word rather then 
> anything else.   I maintain that compression boards
> are bound to have 
> sound characteristics of their own.  Whether any
> given individual 
> prefers the sound of one type of board over another
> is the same thing to 
> me as whether they prefer a Bechstein over a
> Waldorf. :)
> 
> There was an interesting point going around Europe
> just before Fenner 
> died.  Fenner had influenced so many manufactures to
> follow his idea of 
> what science dictated a piano must have (and not
> have) that many 
> manufacturers (the discussion maintained) had rather
> lost their own 
> individuality and began sounding more and more
> alike.  Ok... they may 
> have been <<better made>> in some real sense of the
> word.  But.... the 
> industry became curiously enough poorer for the
> doing. 
> 
> I dunno... I get into trouble around here for waving
> this flag.  I try 
> to be dispassionate about it all... but yet now that
> I've dipped my 
> hands and feet seriously into soundboard projects...
> I find myself 
> enthusastically digging through all the possible
> alternatives I can 
> find.  Its easier for me to see why folks whove
> worked at it for many 
> years and have many many rebuilds under their belts
> and have found what 
> they believe wholeheartedly to be some of the holy
> grails of answers in 
> this work swear so ardently by what they've learned.
>  Still... I have 
> this thing that tells me... to each their own....
> and that sticks deep.
> 
> Cheers
> RicB
> 
> 
> Thumpy dares to slip out on the list :
> 
> P.S. I DO accept the general superiority of
> rib-crowned boards, but NO ONE has yet explained to
> me
> why these four magnificent uprights I have
> ( 2 Knabes, 1 Ivers and Pond, 1 Packard ) with wide,
> fat ribs, all allegedly "compression crowned" and,
> by
> the general consensus here therefore "inferior", are
> THE BEST OLD PIANOS I HAVE EVER HEARD, BEAUTIFULLY
> PRESERVED, WARM, RICH, LOUD, FULL AND RESONANT!
>       Were it just one, I could consider it an
> anomaly. But since ANY of these four CLOBBERS the
> hundreds of other pianos I have heard, tonally, I am
> not yet satisfied with the condemnation their
> construction style has reaped here.
>      I'm no expert, but we're missing something, I'm
> sure.
> _______________________________________________
> Pianotech list info:
> https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pianotech list info:
> https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com