JD wrote:
"Of course the free assembly will crown up as the board takes on moisture
{after being dried down pre-ribbing}. ...that's how the soundboard is given
its crown by the English method..."
> "Well I've read so many messages on this list about rib-crowned and
> supported boards as though it was something new, when I can see nothing
> different between this and the traditional English method that was
> practised from about 130 years ago."
RC&S design sounboards do not rely on the panel re-hydrating after ribbing
to produce crown. The crown is set by rib shape. So there appears large
fundamental differences between the RC&S boards and the traditional English
method as you have described it. And who ever said RC&S concepts were new?
Uncommon these days, yes. New, no.
15-foot radius crown is not exaggerated, but rather commonly found in RC&S
soundboards. A panel in a soundboard with that kind of crown certainly would
have some significant degree of compression in it if it were to be
flattened - but why on earth would anyone want to flatten it? I don't get my
soundboards anywhere near flat after stringing.
Terry Farrell
----- Original Message -----
> At 09:45 -0500 23/1/08, Erwinspiano at aol.com wrote:
>
>>... I suspect that pianos are made differently for the European palate or
>>your expectations of tone & power are entirely different. Viva la
>>difference
>> Many of us on this list as you know have been working with newer
>> designs to prolong tonal capabilities, soundboard longevity & create new
>> tonal envelopes without the destruction of wood cells produced by over
>> drying panels before the ribs are glued on. (C.C. Methods) Apparently you
>> all have figured that out how to defeat that years ago so boards never
>> need changing in Europe or your idea of what consitutes fine has a
>> different definition than we have here.
>
> Dale, you've got the wrong end of the stick! As I wrote in my reply to
> David Love, I am all for putting in a new soundboard if the value of the
> piano warrants it and I wish there were a thriving tradition of proper
> restoration in England. I am not too familiar with practices in
> neighbouring European countries but they'd have a job to beat compete for
> low quality with English standards today, which is a great shame.
>
> When the spring comes I shall be fitting new soundboards in two grand
> pianos and you will hear the results.
>
>> SO by Yankee definition & by the lack of tone we see in a flat boards &
>> the improvements we can create building new R.C. boards & R.C. &
>> supported boards, there is an entire world of tone that is waiting to be
>> discovered by the World at large.
>
> Well I've read so many messages on this list about rib-crowned and
> supported boards as though it was something new, when I can see nothing
> different between this and the traditional English method that was
> practised from about 130 years ago. I can remember well very early in my
> career coming across American Steinway grands with the dead singing
> octaves (what I call the flute section) and this and other really shoddy
> characteristics of these pianos led me always to avoid them. I have
> described the English method, which is outlined in Wolfenden's book and
> would like someone to explain _precisely_ what you meean with all your CCs
> and RCs and RCSs. If Terry Farrell, for example thinks a 15ft radius on
> the unstrung crown is not exaggerated, I am to take it that his board will
> be CC, for to be sure it will be compressed if he ever gets it anywhere
> near flat. There's far too much jargon used here and far too many ideas
> presented as the very latest thing when they're nothing of the kind. If I
> with all my experience get confused with all the unnecessary acronyms and
> fake jargon, goodness knows what the ordinary list subscriber must be
> making of it.
>
> JD
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC