[CAUT] Steinway verdigris

[Horace Greeley]

Hi,

Sorry...just catching up on this.

At 04:12 PM 1/7/2011, you wrote:
>On 1/7/2011 3:54 PM, Ed Sutton wrote:
>>This fron Allen Wright in London, concerning whether he finds 
>>verdigris in European-made Steinways:
>>
>>"actually no, I don't, now that you mention it."
>
>Presumably, they never dipped the flanges in tallow?

The tallow thing is a very long-standing myth.  Except in very small 
amounts to lubricate springs, tallow (either sheep or bear) was not 
used in the action department.  While tallow was used (bear, when 
available) was much earlier in production and was used in the 
trapwork.    Tallow not only gums up quickly, but also leaves 
interesting odors as it decays...try mixing up a batch of tallow and 
paraffin wax in a pot on your kitchen stove and letting is simmer for 
a few days.

Paraffin came to be used in what someone appropriately noted as S&S' 
continual search for tight, low-friction bearing surfaces.  The 
buckets into which parts (flanges only, unless the piano was being 
"tropicalized") were dipped were filled with melted paraffin wax, 
which was not mixed with tallow.  As the action/piano reached the end 
of final tone regulation, a minute amount of whale oil was added to 
the hammer and wippen support flanges.

Reading through this thread, it seems to me that the chronology of 
use of different solutions, chemicals, and procedures for center 
pinning and related issues supports the idea that S&S, among others, 
was looking for ways to compensate with a target that was (and is) 
moving through at least four dimensions.  After WWII, the quality of 
a variety of materials essential to making pianos "the way they used 
to" either diminished or evaporated.  Most makers of the period of 
the 50's and 60's were dealing with bushing cloth that was clearly 
pretty substandard (wool felt and cloth with less lanolin, no whale 
oil, wood that no longer really met traditional specifications, 
etc).  Even some of the attempts made in Europe (one thinks of 
graphite impregnated cloth) weren't all that successful.  So, it's 
not all that far afield to think that folks were scrambling to try to 
find substitutes so that they could stay in business.

Earlier in the discussion either Fred Sturm or Ed Sutton noted the 
differences between differing kinds of parrafin.  As I think was 
noted then, there is (once again) so much cross-use of the same term 
to describe various materials that it can all become a big 
muddle.  One quick review is the one in the Wikipedia at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraffin

Best.

Horace