Hey - those old Chickering quarter grands are one of the few pianos you'll not need to install a fish in.......... (only pianos I've seen like that). Terry Farrell On Aug 8, 2009, at 3:18 PM, William Truitt wrote: > Jim: > > I think your question falls into the category of The Great Mysteries > of Chickering Piano Design. As a rebuilder who has suffered at the > rim of many a Chickering, I too have a list of questions I want to > ask dear old Jonas and his descendants when I pass through the > Pearly Gates. Like, whassup with that four piece pinblock? And why > do you hate me so much – what did I ever do to you – I wasn’t even > born yet! > > I suspect it has more to do with a designer falling too much in love > with his ideas, no matter how bad they are. If you have ever looked > at patents for piano design, you know he surely wasn’t alone. > > Look at the bright side! At least it’s not a Kranich and Bach. > > And yet I confess to a perverse affection for these old > Chickerings. I know it’s not good for me, but I can’t stop myself. > > Will > > From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] > On Behalf Of jim ialeggio > Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 11:21 AM > To: pianotech at ptg.org > Subject: [pianotech] Chickering's splayed actions...Why? > > I've been wondering about the concept of the splayed grand action > for a while. > > Why would a manufacturer do this to themselves? I don't mean this > as a pejorative question. Rather, I have to assume manufacturers > were chasing after some design goal with this splay, since angled > shanks impose 88 different geometries, further (and somewhat > excessively) complicating an action's already complicated collection > of geometries. > > Chickering did this for what(?)...75 years. It wasn't a one off > trick. And further, they had to pull it off in a production setting. > So what might they have been up to? > > I can come up with a couple of guesses, but I wonder if any of you > manufacturer design guys have any insight on this question. > > possibilities?: > > 1- the angled shank imposes a rotation on the hammer. Is there a > tonal effect they were looking for, as the most aggressive angles > were in the low tenor and bass? Reduction of bass power so as not to > overpower the treble? > > 2- Is it the vestigial remains of a previous way of thinking about > action design? > > 3- To my eye, the proportions of Chickering cases are often > significantly more graceful than the cases of other modern pianos. > Could the splay have allowed a visual reduction in the required > acreage needed to house an action? > > The recent short thread on Brown actions brought this to mind. > > Jim I > > > -- > grandpianosolutions.com (under construction) > Shirley, MA (978) 425-9026 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech.php/attachments/20090808/a7687af4/attachment-0001.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC