Soundboard Thoughts (Kind of long)

[Delwin D Fandrich]

Stephen Birkett wrote:

> > ... We say we want the piano to "sound like it
> > did when it was new." The trouble with all of this lovely sentiment is --
> > we don't have a clue as to what it sounded like when it was new. None of
> > us were there when that piano rolled of the assembly line. And even if we
> > had been, our tone memory is simply not that good or that consistent.
> >
> We don't have to have been there to deduce the original character of
> something...otherwise history would be relegated to fiction, and no-one
> would study anything but current events. It doesn't take the deductive
> powers of a Sherlock Holmes to distinguish between:
>
> 1. Board A is deteriorated and consequently the piano it's in is not
> sounding its best. Fix it, replace it, whatever it takes....subject to
> historical artifact considerations. We've been through, and are apparently
> going through again with Marilyn Monroe, the techniques ad infinitum on
> the list.
> VS
> 2. Board B is in perfect condition and, notwithstanding other
> considerations, ephermera that need replacing, the piano is presumably
> sounding as it did when new (more of less).
>
> The debate is really whether case 2. occurs. As far as historical pianos
> it most certainly does, whether or not it can be verified by time
> machine. Recognition of case 2. is simply possible by eliminating case 1.
>
> Del's theory on the inevitability of case 1. (like the end of the world),
> no matter how cleverly concealed, brings us back to that arrheodictic vs
> rheodictic debate. But in fact that is really irrelevant. Even if wood
> *is* rheodictic, i.e. continues linear creep strain under finite load over
> infinite time...observation of historical artifacts and structures (again)
> implies time dependent creep strain is insignificant over human time
> scales (which is all that really matters). Of course, that applies to
> loads that don't cause failure within a short period of time (2, 3 maybe 10
> years?....as any good design will satisfy.
>
> Stephen

-------------------------------

As I've said before, what constitutes good design in one case does not necessarily constitute good design in a completely
different situation. Both design and process must be appropriate to their situation.

Del