Frank Weston wrote: >One of the most successful and largest volume restorers on the East Coast >uses a method similar to the one I describe above. They have tried >alternative methods (shaping ribs) but had an inordinate amount of failures >of soundboards so constructed and long ago reverted to traditional >construction. Who is this, please? Frank also wrote: >Their observation was that not only were the alternatively >constructed soundboards more likely to fail, but they were also less >responsive musically. This statement motivates quite a list of questions - 1) Which pianos use "traditional" (in Frank's terminology) sb's? 2) Does the unnamed restorer reinstall "traditional" sb's in pianos that were originally manufactured with "alternate" sb's? 3) If so, what specific changes does the restorer make to accomodate a different kind of sb? 4) What proportion of pianos that this restorer restored had "traditional" sb's? There are other questions, but answers to these would go a long way in elucidating Frank's advocacy of "traditional" sb's. It would be especially helpful to know which manufacturers use "traditional" sb's and which use "alternate" sb's. Then those of us who don't know will be able to observe and evaluate pianos in the field and throw our observations into the discussion. Bob Anderson Tucson, AZ
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC