I’ve read a bunch of observations about the new Hurstwood system of bridge
termination. I wish that I could have gone to the convention this year to
see it for myself. I was born in Grand Rapids and have never been back so I
was really looking forward to it but business tanked out pretty badly for me
as of the end of last year. Interestingly enough beginning about three weeks
before the convention we had a very large uptick in business and now we’re
quite busy. I guess that’s just the way it goes. Anyway as I’m looking at
the Hurstwood bridge pictures I’m wondering if I’m the only one reminded of
the Stuart system. Anyone else see a resemblance?
Greg Newell
Greg's Piano Forté
www.gregspianoforte.com
216-226-3791 (office)
216-470-8634 (mobile)
From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Fred
Sturm
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 11:07 PM
To: caut at ptg.org
Subject: Re: [CAUT] Thanks! (PTG Convention and institute)
I'll echo the pat on the back for the institute committee: very
smoothly and efficiently run, and a great lineup My only complaint is that I
was scheduled to teach opposite Andre Oorebeek, so I missed his class ;-(
Can't really complain, because the institute team got to attend zero of the
classes they lined up.
This convention was an especially interesting one because of
some fairly radical things that were presented, things that I think we will
be seeing for many years to come. A sampling:
1) Phoenix Piano Systems/Steingraeber. In short, amazing! The carbon fiber
board was remarkable. The sound had elements that were different from
spruce, but overall it sounded, well, like a good piano. Like a piano with
extra power and carry. When you played harder, there seemed to be more of a
power increase as opposed to simply voicing gradient compared to a wooden
board.
But the Phoenix System bridge termination/coupling system was
the real eye opener. They had four grand pianos set up. One was a 5'8" (or
so) Steingraeber with carbon board and Phoenix bridge. Next to it an
identical piano, but with spruce board, Next to it a Steingraber concert
grand in traditional setup (standard pinned bridge). And finally a rebuilt
Baldwin, with the terminators going up to near the top of octave 5, standard
pinned bridge above. So you could tell what difference it made very
obviously.
My verdict? Wow! Wapin on steroids. Sustain and clarity. And
lots of "side effects" that go along with losing those bridge pins (like all
the complaints we constantly make about them, from noises to dirty
termination to false beats to tuning issues).
Bottom line, I think this is the real thing, well worth the
convention just to see it. This is the invention of some Brits, at
http://www.hurstwoodfarmpianos.co.uk/. I assume they will be
selling/licensing the bridge system, though the website doesn't talk about
that (yet, at least). Retrofit would require milling a few mms off the
bridge top, so it is far more involved than a Wapin job.
BTW, this system is set up with zero downbearing (the coupling
system makes downbearing unnecessary). The carbon fiber board is less than 2
mm thick. The spruce board with the Phoenix System was 4 mm thick. A wee bit
revolutionary.
2) Weickert felt (a product of the Wurzen felt company licensed exclusively
to Renner), debuting on the Ravenscroft piano. I think the Weickert felt is
very much parallel to the Abel Natural felt, and that both of these are a
real step forward. After nearly 30 years of watching the latest crazes in
hammers come and go, I have become a bit jaded. But now I think we finally
have something real. A lot of the "fads" have focused on the hammer pressing
operation, from cold to hot to in between, hard to soft to medium. And
results have been pretty unpredictable, at least in my limited experience.
Both Renner Weickert and Abel Natural are going back to basics
of felt making. Both reject the use of acids and bleaches in processing the
wool (both of which are bound to damage fibers). Both take extra care to the
details of felt making: laying out the carded fibers so that the fibers are
aligned (meaning layers of felt around the hammer molding, thus control of
tension and compression); carefully controlled felting process so that there
is extraordinary consistency in density and interlocking of fibers; control
of dimension, so that the sheet has just the right taper to go into the
cutting and pressing without sanding; a controlled gradient of density from
bass to treble. The result is a very consistent felt, that makes a very
consistent hammer. The raw sound is already quite nice, and tone gradient
can be developed by a very consistent needling technique.
3) WNG parts. We have all heard about a number of their new products in the
past few months, and have all received promo materials. They are still
moving ahead at a rapid pace. Coming up are shanks with adjustable knuckles:
like with wippens and heels, the knuckles can be glued to fit into a range
of notches to get something like 15 to 19 mm in half mm increments (buy one
set and experiment, and then set it up the way you want to). Also on the
horizon is a new hard bushing, of a teflon like material. They have tested
it to some number of million swings and found friction to move very little,
while firmness stays the same. Set in plastic flanges, humidity will
obviously not be a factor. They also have sets of burnishers and reamers by
.0005" (half thousandths) with lovely handles.
4) Stanwood's adjustable key ratio invention. This allows for a fulcrum to
be moved under each key (all of them moved the same amount at once),
somewhat on the same theory as using split felt punchings to adjust where
the key pivots. The device allows for action ratio to be changed between 5:1
and 6:1 (moving the fulcra about 4-5 mm). The result is very interesting,
and it confirms experimentally some thoughts that have been expressed (by
myself among others) about the probable effect on tone and tonal control
(due to different acceleration possibilities).
This was installed on David's personal M&H A, with fairly light,
fairly mellow hammers. In the class I attended, it was played by a couple
pianists, and it was quite obvious which ratio was which just by listening.
In comparison, the 5:1 sounded like a subtle muffler felt had been placed
between the hammers and the strings. The higher ratio made for a more
singing tone, and for more of a gradient between melody and accompaniment.
This, of course, should be taken with a grain of salt, as applying to this
particular setup. In any case, a remarkable experiment, allowing us to hear
the results of a single change that is otherwise difficult to achieve.
Whether or not this turns into a widespread devise (I'm sure it will have at
least a niche market), its educational uses are invaluable.
5) On a smaller scale, those who have read Oorebeek's book and watched the
DVD, will have seen that sandpaper he describes as mylar backed which he
used for filing hammers. I saw and read, and I went looking, and found
nothing available. Jurgen of Pianoforte Supply has made it available.
Expensive, but wonderful stuff (at least on first use, and I think it will
hold up very, very well). It is micron graded abrasives, so you get ratings
of size rather than number per area. It is an industrial product, aimed at
use for machining things like crankshafts, best I have been able to figure
out. Anyway, for practical, everyday use, this is something that will
certainly change my life for the better. Cuts beautifully, very stable
backing, so it can be controlled very well for fine results.
Lots more. Those are just a selection of things that stuck out
particularly for me. The state of the piano manufacturing industry is very
shaky, but the state of piano technology is seemingly in fast forward mode.
Regards,
Fred Sturm
University of New Mexico
fssturm at unm.edu
On Jul 21, 2009, at 4:40 PM, Jim Busby wrote:
All,
As one of the assistant directors on the institute team, I want to thank
everyone who taught, helped out, and/or attended the Annual Convention and
Institute in Grand Rapids. Ward did a great job as director, and generally,
I thought it was a very successful event. Kudos to him!
Being the “newbie” on the institute team I was amazed at the amount of work
done “behind the scenes”. 5:30 am daily to sometimes 10:00 pm. The pedometer
of one worker counted over 110 miles in those few days. As far as I know,
nothing was lost, broken, or otherwise damaged. While nothing is ever
perfect and we can certainly improve, I believe this convention and
institute was well thought out and effectively run. Jeff Hickey, our very
capable director for next year is already starting to get ready for next
year! Me, I’m going on vacation for a week!
Thanks again.
Sincerely,
Jim Busby
Assistant Institute Director
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/caut.php/attachments/20090722/b3e507ac/attachment-0001.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC