Soundboard grain angle

[Delwin D Fandrich]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Phillip L Ford" <fordpiano@lycos.com>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: December 04, 2001 10:24 PM
Subject: Re: Soundboard grain angle


> How about having the grain angle perpendicular to the bridge or belly rail
in the top section and along the bridge in the lower section?  It would mean
an obvious joint in the board but so what?
>
> Phil

That's another one of those things I've thought about but haven't bothered
with. As I think it through I can't see that the advantages are worth the
trouble. Again, I can pretty much get what I want with ribs.

But this does bring up another subject. Why are we so picky about the
perceived 'quality' of our soundboard wood. The soundboard is simply a
(more-or-less) two-dimensional, wave-carrying medium. To make an efficient
soundboard requires only that the system be relatively light weight and
relatively stiff. It could care less if there are 'character' flaws in the
wood, as there naturally are. It doesn't care much at all about the color or
texture of the wood. If fact, within some limits, it doesn't even care what
the grain width is. (I'm assuming a rib-crowned board.)

Some years ago I examined a piano soundboard made up of shorts end-glued
together. The end-glue joints were made something like a lying down Z. After
nearly 100 years the joints were still sound and the board worked just fine.
I'm going to do this one day soon--just to prove a point.

The problem here is that as we continue to demand only the super-premium
wood for our soundboards we ensure a tremendous amount of waste. And, quite
frankly, we don't have that many trees to waste them just to please our
aesthetic taste and to fit a bunch of rules that no longer apply. If they
ever did. For example, take a good, close look at the wood used in some of
the late 19th century and early 20th century pianos. We would reject it out
of hand as not being 'good' enough.

Ok, end of rant.

Del