[pianotech] [pianotech ]Board & tone styles was hammer strike line

[Joe Goss]

Hi Ron,
Good to see you back to your old phunny self <G>
Joe Goss BSMusEd MMusEd RPT
imatunr at srvinet.com
www.mothergoosetools.com
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ron Nossaman" <rnossaman at cox.net>
To: <pianotech at ptg.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2010 9:56 AM
Subject: Re: [pianotech] [pianotech ]Board & tone styles was hammer strike 
line


> David Love wrote:
>>Where the division is between RC&S and hybrid isn’t that clear to me.
>
> Me either. It's a continuum, not like a magic spot where the clouds part 
> and the holy sunbeam blesses the board. There's a pretty wide range. I've 
> said many times that we're shooting at a pretty wide target here, and 
> almost anything can produce a decent result at least often enough to 
> appear to be working. If this wasn't the case, none of us would be able to 
> build acceptable soundboards.
>
>
>>I design ribs to support everything required and rib boards usually at 
>>6.5% but if I go to 6% does that make it a hybrid since I’m adding a bit 
>>more compression?
>
> I don't think so, because the ribs are still stout enough do the job by 
> themselves. Then there's, as you said, seasonal changes and whether the 
> piano ends up in Aridzona or Mississlippy.
>
>
>>One thing I do notice about RC&S boards is that they are pretty tolerant 
>>of these differences.
>
> Yes they are. They are also more tolerant of bearing loading and strike 
> point differences, at C-8 as well as through the killer octave.
>
>
>>I’ve set up and heard pianos with rib scales that vary somewhat and the 
>>tonal differences are minimal.  You can obviously overdesign a scale or 
>>underdesign it but within a range it seems to work without too much 
>>difference in tonal response.
>
> Yes, just crowning the ribs, making them stiffer, and giving them a 
> greater percentage of the load with lower panel compression helps 
> noticeably. Going full RC&S helps more.
>
>
> >The other aspects such as rib material,
>> tapering, cut-off bars, fish, rib arrays I think of as features and may 
>> or may not be components of  any particular method.
>
> May not, but the bass cutoff and fish make the ribs shorter, therefor 
> stiffer, before any other changes are made. Almost a freebie.
>
>
>> Clearly all methods are capable of producing good sounding pianos.
>
> As is continually acknowledged, and eternally defended in spite of the 
> acknowledgment.
>
>
>> Given other circumstances like unlimited time, money and resources I 
>> could see experimenting more with the hybrid method.
>
> I want to try a piece of cheap plywood, like the 5mm mahogany Yamaha used 
> to use for crates (I don't think the current cardboard would quite get 
> it). Trying to make a living has gotten in the way of the plan so far. 
> Years ago, I bent and glued a straight piece of scrap pine to a 20cm wide 
> piece of that crate material. It's about 80cm long, with the single "rib" 
> 20mm wide and 18mm tall. No feathering. It's crowned about 12mm in the 
> middle, and will support over 200lbs without bottoming out. I'm not so 
> sure we need carbon fiber, titanium, Kevlar, Nomex (except for flame 
> suits), or most of the exotic approaches we (all) tend to automatically 
> gravitate toward to make ourselves look high tech and marketable. Getting 
> past the glitz and spin, and the DEEPLY entrenched mystical nonsense and 
> denial, the basic requirements aren't apparently that exotic or even 
> complicated. It just takes some education and work. When someone finally 
> nails it down and quantifies it in detail, we can look back and see how 
> close we were, or how very far off, with our chosen methods.
>
> The automatic "proof is in the pudding" defense isn't informative and no 
> one learns anything at all from it. This isn't about voicing skills, 
> market share, tone testimonials, or meticulous craftsman like attention to 
> infinitely recursive details like becket alignment. It's about basic 
> principles of function (and yes, I spelled it right this time in spite of 
> the automatic brain dysfunction that wants to spell it "principals" even 
> though I know the difference), and trying to discover what the rules 
> actually are so we can all do better work more dependably.
>
> I have a quote (unknown source) on the wall that says "When you earnestly 
> believe you can compensate for a lack of skill by doubling your efforts, 
> there's no end to what you can't do". It reminds me that once I'm down to 
> the molecules looking for a fix, it's already way too late, and it's time 
> to go back, check premises, and question what I think I know. Sometimes it 
> works...
> Ron N