[CAUT] Steinway verdigris

Susan Kline skline at peak.org
Fri Jan 7 18:41:34 MST 2011


Hi, Horace

So really what they were dipped in was wax solid at room temperature,
instead of what we'd usually call mineral oil, with the addition of a
little bit of whale oil in the last stage of manufacture?

Was the hot wax dip done before the bushings were put in, and the whale
oil after?

Do you think that various lubricants added later in the field worsen the
situation? I remember a piano in Stockton, which I tried to keep going 
till the
owner could afford new parts (after moving to Hawaii .. given the cost
of moving to Hawaii, one sees a certain order in her priorities.)

I used the "zapper" to get the thing moving again -- it was pretty well
stationary, and a dark walnut brown. Oily substance bubbled and sizzled out
of the flanges.

I presume this was almost certainly a mixture of lubricants added at 
various
times in attempts to keep the piano working.

If only the wippen support flanges and the hammer flanges were dipped, then
presumably if the paraffin worsened the verdigris, the other two center 
pins
in the action (and those in the back action, too) would have been 
relatively
free of it, unless the piano was "tropicalized"?

I remember seeing a Packard upright from the deep south. It was a mess, 
from
various attempts to deal with sluggish hammers -- repeated lubrication 
turning
everything to gum till the hammers stood in air, and then someone doused it
with alcohol, causing the leathers to shrink and warp and turn to rocks. 
But
the other centers were perfectly all right, which led me to think that this
was "tuner damage."

Susan

On 1/7/2011 4:59 PM, Horace Greeley wrote:
>
> 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
>
>
>




More information about the CAUT mailing list

This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC