[pianotech] Restringing at Lower Tension

[David Love]

I have to agree with Del here on the hammer choice.  Considering the board
is probably a bit weak and prone to some percussive tendencies and add the
lighter gauge strings and therefore less downbearing and a lowering of the
impedance I think you want to be careful using a hammer that is too hard.
Since the action ratio dictates a light hammer anyway that works out because
I think you'll be best with one, especially in the treble section.  Lower
tension (if that's the route you go) will increase hammer string contact
time and reduce partial development.  So light and not to hard will serve
this project well, I would think.  Bacon or a light set of Weickert hammers
if you want to go a bit firmer.  Del's also right that a complete assessment
of the scale even if you aren't changing the speaking lengths can serve to
clean things up some, get the tensions and other factors more in line with
each other and get a batter balance.  

 

While we're on this subject I tuned a small Fuerich grand today (172 cm).
It's really a beautifully made piano but, IMO, the scale tensions are simply
too high.  To give an idea, in the treble section, C88, 52 mm and 13.5
gauge, note 73, 112 mm 15 gauge puts those tensions up in the 170 lb range.
But worse it's a highish tension achieved largely by string diameter (more
than length).  It creates a much harder and edgier sound up there that you
just can't voice out.  If you soften the hammers it get dull and harsh
rather than bright and harsh, if that makes sense-like putting Steinway
hammers on an old Yamaha.  The board seems to be pretty light just from a
cursory look at the ribbing (which means a bad match possibly).  There's
plenty of backscale (and a nice laminated cap as well).  Bass relationship
to tenor is nice, 29 note bass with 13 monochords, long backscale, though
the scaling is a bit weird, some inharmonicity problems evident with how it
tunes.  Might be the shape of the bridge was done to match the plate rather
than the other way around.  More likely just poor diameter choices.  But in
fairness, I haven't analyzed it.  

 

Anyway, point being that here's a piano that, in my opinion, could be really
nice if the scale were lighter and more balanced with the soundboard (and
the hammer along with it) and is a good example of getting two of the three
things coordinated (scale and hammer) but the board weighting is for
something else-maybe. Again, I've not analyzed it, just reacting to what I
hear.  At $75,000 new, however, I'm not suggesting that to the customer.  

 

(BTW, nice to be able to cut and paste a picture here, even though it won't
make it to the archives)  HTML required for this viewing.   

 

David Love

www.davidlovepianos.com

 

 



 

 

 

 

 

Hmmmm. light and big (lots of air space between fibers). Like an Isaac

(though he no longer appears in the Directory)? Density can be adjusted

during the voicing, and there are plenty of light hammer sets around. (Among

them, I'd  choose an Abel.)

-----

 

      Personally, from what you've written about the desired timbral goals

for this piano--and assuming a suitably light scale--I'd be looking at

something like a cold-pressed Ronsen with Bacon felt. 

 

ddf

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20110818/d6aa70a7/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 66165 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20110818/d6aa70a7/attachment-0001.jpeg>