David I haven't looked at the rib scale for a while but believe it had 16 ribs with curved cut-off,fish, belly brace like railroad tie and a small cut-off bar and the two bridges were separated, removing the ring. These were not laminated ribs but tight grain solid ribs or rib crowned. It was bellied at 6%. The rib ends were more conventional style cut-outs not the 1/3, 1/3, 1/3 thd arrangement of the pure laminated model Ron posted some time back. So if that's a hybrid so be it. Doesn't matter. many really liked that piano. Sweet yet visceral projection,enormous sustain. One thing for anyone to keep in mind to anyone listening to all the various experiences of any piano/board designer on the list or elsewhere is that it's important to factor in that each of us has a sound we are attempting to achieve. A different flavor, and it doesn't make one right or wrong but it does make it truly enjoyable to hear especially when great music is heard on them all. All the modifications are nice but the client has to sign onto that and pay for it. All that to say there are many factors to consider when doing this work and as David L pointed out in the choosing a hammer discussion ,there are even more in soundboard design or tone design. Wether a board is designed on a spreadsheet, by intuition and repition, or the seat your pants the end result is what speaks for itself. Dale Original Message----- From: David Andersen <david at davidandersenpianos.com> To: pianotech at ptg.org Sent: Mon, Feb 8, 2010 10:20 am Subject: Re: [pianotech] Hammer strike line. Was-----Yamaha Hammer Suggestion Let me jump in here...hopefully my brother Dale will too. The rebuilt "C" we brought to Rochester in 2006 has a RC&S board, and the tone in notes 68-76 got WAY better when we arced the line in, as Dale's pic showed. Whattup with THAT, Nossaman? Love and kisses....<g> DA On Feb 7, 2010, at 5:43 PM, PAULREVENKOJONES at aol.com wrote: Let me also say, Ron, that I was speaking to the differences between new soundboard installation with new hammers and what we find from the factory. If it is indeed a difference between soundboard panel construction, the evidence albeit being sketchy at best so far, it is an interesting distinction and well worth studying. And my point, again, was that factory production rarely allows for deviations from straight lines, particularly in hammer production and installation. Nor was I imputing a presumption on your part. Relax. Paul In a message dated 2/7/2010 7:16:15 P.M. Central Standard Time, rnossaman at cox.net writes: PAULREVENKOJONES at aol.com wrote: > I would posit that it's factory work, whatever the soundboard panel > structure. Efficient factory forefinishing has to presume much too > consistent a belly structure. Thoughtful deviations from a straight line > require time and care. I don't think it's primarily the soundboard. Meaning that in all the RC&S soundboards you've installed, you've never not had to deviate from a straight strike line? I'm not talking about assuming anything at all. "Whatever the soundboard structure" is the point, not factory presumption. Ron N = -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech.php/attachments/20100208/02539a63/attachment-0001.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC