voicing

[Delwin D Fandrich]

----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Brekne <richardb@c2i.net>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 1999 11:30 PM
Subject: Re: voicing


> ... So when redesigning string scales it seems possible to me that
> they are playing bingo to some degree. Without knowing more about the
condition of
> the soundboard then its present downbearing / string deflection readings,
how can
> one be sure that any given new string scale and or lowering the plate will
be
> benificial? The results seem to bear out my skeptism in this regard. Often
as not
> the results are less then satisfactory soundwise.

Sometimes it is worse than bingo. When you lose at bingo you don't lose
much.  Guess wrong with a piano scale and you might lose a plate.  The key
words above are "without knowing more...."  That is the essence of the whole
thing.  If anyone is going to get into this type of work it is imperative
that they "know more."  This requires much more than simply purchasing a
scale program and plugging in some numbers.  The numbers, without the
knowledge to back them up, are quite often worse than meaningless.  They are
dangerous.  This is the very reason why I push classes on theory and design
fundamentals.  Not glamerous, perhaps, but essential if one is going to go
beyond conventional rebuilding.


> Your thoughts ??..  Also you mention some info Del has at one time offered
about
> viewing ribbing as a center beam. Can you refer me to any specific reading
on this
> and other such soundboard related material?

Check the old Journals and the pianotech archives.  Or wait for the book.


> When I am restringing after a soundboard fix, I routinely use the same
scale, and
> try to achieve the same, or slightly less downbearing. I do this simply
because I do
> not feel confident in changing things without knowing more then I do about
these
> issues. As far as lessening downbearing (gut feeling really), seems like
an old
> soundboard must be weaker, ergo less stiff / resiliant. Doing this
combined with
> very slow and even tension raising to bring the piano up to pitch
(typically one
> month) seems to be my best guarantee of not wrecking the sound of a piano.

This is, by far, the safest way.  And it is the method I strongly recommend
to all who do not wish to study and understand the basics of piano function
and design.  Even without replacing the soundboard the results will usually
be an improvement.  The piano will be tunable and the new strings will
probably sound better than the aged originals.  Despite all of the work
invested, the soundboard will not really have any more crown than it had
before the rebuilding work began, but the cracks will be filled and it will
look better.  (Unless the ribs are replaced, which is a whole other story.)
It will probably still have tone problems in the bass/tenor crossover, but
they won't be worse than they were before.  The treble should be a bit
better, but the "killer octave" will still be a problem.  If not immediately
after the rebuilding, then fairly soon after.  Well, you get the idea.  Yes,
many improvements will be made through the rebuilding process, but the
results will not be quite as good as they could have been with careful and
intelligently applied redesign principles.

The problem is that all of this work will not give the customer the best
results that could have been achieved.  This wouldn't be such an issue if
piano manufacturers were pushing the envelope of piano design and offering
the market pianos that have noticeably higher levels of performance than
those built 50 or 100 years ago.  As it is if a pianist wants a higher level
of performance he or she must go to the redesigning remanufacturer.

Regards,

Del