---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
Wow
I went to convention & this thread is still active after a week.
Always a good sign IMO. Gordon I've been following some of this & I think I
understand where your'e coming from.
Do I hear someone saying "oh crap here he goes again"...... Oh well
Gordon, to reiterate what some have said....... many forms of boards
work, but repeatable, duplicate results is the name of the game, as far as is
possible in the realm of the materials we work with. We weren't around to see a
numbers of units come off a production line & judge these under our tonal
microscopes. How unfortunate. Never the less, I, as well as others are amazed
by the intersting sdbd designs seen in the field but I probably wouldn't
build one that way today well ....unless you want to be my patron.
I've built dozens of boards in different iterations & thru that have
discovered a sound I love which seems to be repeatable. No, I'll admit, early on
not all my boards have met my expectations but as I have applied ideas
gleaned from others, taken risks etc. the results have improved repeatably &
dramtically.
This type of empirical experience has NO substitute & the only way I
or anyone can prove results is to put yourself in front of instruments that
come from here & elsewhere, put your fingers & ears on it & do your own test
& then decide for yourself if modern RC designs provide a musically
excellent outcome.
Many folks this past weekend in Los Angeles had that opportunity to do
just that. June 21st You can do the same in Rochester. This has rarely
happened & I've been waiting along time for it to happen again. Sign up....go
I'll speak for all others guys taking restored instruments to
Rochester.......
It's a lot of work to get a piano prepped,shined & primed for such an
event & if all one has to do is get there I think it will be a very
fascinating convention for those in attendance
My humble designs, which I call VRS "Variable Radius Soundboard" Has
produced very consistent results. It's not even my idea ..so what, it works.
Be that as it may I rebuilt a Ivers & Pond 6ft grand that was from the
20's. It had big wide flatish ribs & a .400 thick panel. Wow ..
Strung up it showed no signs of residual crown as tested with a string
across the boards bottom. Un strung the crown jumped up at least 10 mm. The
sustain was incredible in this piano. Analyzing the string scale showed a
scale very near the breaking strength in the middle portions of plain wire but
wow did it sound good. The tighter a wire the better it seems to sound. Many
things , as usual ,contribute to the sound being achieved & this was no
exception.
However my Sister had /has a large ornate rebuilt Ivers & Pond upright
turn o century style also with the wide flat ribs design. The bass is
astounding the mid tenor really good but from approx. note 55 on up it suffers big
time from low impedance creating a weak treble So..... she bought a AA
Mason
That said ,Would I build this Ivers grand design? No.... did it work. Yes
,but how bout the countless others that came out with it & the ones you
mentioned we'll never know.
Postulate away
Dale Erwin
Dear Mr. Nossaman,
I am simply trying to ascertain why these 4
boards, which should be "crap" by the general
"consensus" on this list are, instead, the best
preserved ( tonally ) of any I've heard on pianos this
old. ( And I've heard hundreds. )
My 3 previous inquiries reaped deafening silence.
It was only after I cited a revered authority that
someone ( you ) deemed it necessary to reveal that, in
fact, wide, shallow ribs CAN have rib-crowning. Until
then this feature was unanimously declared here as
indicative of "Strictly CC" boards.
( Thank you very much. )
NOW, I am postulating that grain orientation was
an integral, intentional feature of this design. I am
incredulous regarding your assertion that a
quarter-sawn piece of wood will have the same
characteristics of elasticity and resistance to
compression set, whether the rings run parallel to the
board ( "Pancaked" ) or perpendicular ( "Vertical" ).
If the rings are parallel, their naturally
compact cellular structure will be largely in a state
of tension due to soundboard crown, which I see as
conducive to elasticity in the rib, and resistance to
"compression set". ( Downbearing and vibration will
get them closer to their pre-crowned state of density,
but not beyond it. )
If, on the other hand, the rings are vertical,
particularly if rib-crowning is cut into them, many
more cells will be in compression, which may lead to
excessive stiffness and and earlier breakdown of the
system. ( Caused by compression set within the rib
itself ).
What I am getting at is this: There is no question
in my mind that whoever built these boards knew what
they were doing. All are from top manufacturers, and
all have stood up over time, in a horrid climate,
producing superlative tone. I am merely suggesting
that they intentionally aimed for "the best of all
possible worlds": wide, flat ribs of quartersawn
spruce with the annular rings parallel to the board
surface, for elasticity and longevity.... with some
rib-crowning, as well.
There is nothing wrong with postulating here.
Sure, I'll take a good, close look at these things
when I have the time. But part of the List's utility
is that it provides an opportunity for those who have
already done the looking to speak up, and there,
unfortunately, are certain persons here who have
established a hegemony of opinion which intimidates,
and thereby precludes others from venturing forth, for
fear of having their "Heads bit off", as you did to me
in your last.
All mysteries that have faced mankind,
individually and collectively, have first been
assigned theoretical answers which empirical
investigations confirm or debunk.
I have presented an anomaly to the "List"
"consensus": Four, shallow, wide ribbed pianos which
all sound like thunder after 100 years in a truly
lousy climate. I am merely seeking an explanation, and
appreciate what positive information you have
presented. I must confess, though, that I perceive
some irritation based more on the fact that I have
thrown a "monkey wrench" into the "accepted theory",
rather than that I have merely not "learned enough"
from what has been discussed before.
Peace,
Gordon
.--- Ron Nossaman <rnossaman@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > I'd love to, if I ever get the time.
>
> If you have an hour to dedicate to your education,
> you've got
> the time. If not, you'll never know anyway.
>
>
> >I'm guessin' that
> > the intent of this rib design is to maximize
> support,
> > while retaining excellent elasticity, and that the
> > grain orientation has a lot to do with it.
>
> Yes, that would indeed be guessing. The grain
> orientation has
> virtually nothing to do with it, which you could
> find out for
> yourself with minimal effort and sincere desire to
> know.
>
>
> > P.S. If anyone out there wants to test this
> hypothesis
> > before I can, please feel free, and please report
> > back.
>
> It's been done, and reported to the list, as has
> most of what
> is eternally re-hashed here in perpetual mystery.
> Asking
> questions and speculating randomly is always easier
> than
> working something out for oneself and reaching one's
> own
> conclusions based on the logical reality of what one
> finds,
> and one gets the luxury of picking and choosing what
> one
> wishes to believe as a matter of convenience rather
> than
> considering what the cumulative evidence indicates.
> Life is
> easier, it seems, with the proper filters.
> Ron N
> _______________________________________________
> Pianotech list info:
> https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives
>
Dale Erwins Piano Restorations
4721 Parker Rd.
Modesto, CA 95357
209-577-8397
Specializing in the restoration , service & Sales of
Steinway , Mason & hamlin & other fine pianos.
Erwinspiano@aol.com
---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/fe/18/7d/c7/attachment.htm
---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC