Cross-bar on Steinway D

[James Ellis]

On March 1, Horace Greeley wrote the following regarding the cross-bar on
the D:  "Had sufficiently cost-effective casting technology been available,
this piece would have been case in place long ago."  

The fact it, it was.  When I looked at the old Steinway D that Paderewski
played, it did not just have a cast-in-place cross-bar.  There was a full
cast-in-place strut, running the length from front to back, that coincided
with that mid-point break in the stringing pattern - a full strut that the
modern-day D does not have.  In my opinion, it was a better plate design
than in the modern version.  I don't know why Steinway changed that design,
but I can guess, and I will keep that guess to myself - for the same reason
that the S, the M, and the L are all missing a strut running parallel to
the left extremety of the tenor section.

As for performers of "prepared piano" stuff removing that cross-bar on the
D, or the B, whether it reallly does anything or not, here is the policy I
would suggest:  "The cross-bar of a Steinway B, or D, is a structural part
of the piano, and it is NOT to be tampered with".  That's all you need to say.

To make an analogy:  It's like taking one rafter out of a roof structure.
One rafter out is not going to make the roof fall in on you.  But how many
do you have to take out before it will fall.  Simply have a policy.
Performers DO NOT mess with structural parts of the instrument.  PERIOD!
You could take the policy a step beyond that, as far as I'm concerned.

Sincerely, Jim Ellis