Bass bridge question

[Tony Caught]

Hi Del,

since when has a soundboard been an amplifier ?

Tony Caught

----- Original Message -----
From: Delwin D Fandrich <pianobuilders@olynet.com>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 12:59 AM
Subject: Re: Bass bridge question


>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Overs Pianos" <sec@overspianos.com.au>
> To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
> Sent: January 24, 2001 12:44 AM
> Subject: Re: Bass bridge question
>
>
> > Samuel Wolfenden wrote about the idea of designing scales with
> > increased spacing between adjacent notes in the strike scale. He also
> > constructed prototype instruments to investigate it, concluding that
> > there was no benefit. I have long held the view that the same would
> > apply to unnecessary flare in the bass scale at the bass bridge also.
>
> Thanks. I either missed that or forgot it. Could be either.
>
>
>
> > One possible benefit might be had where a piano exhibited a lower
> > than desirable impedance on the bass bridge at the cross. A greater
> > flare here would place the end of the bass bridge closer to the rim
> > on the bent side, eg. the Welmar 6'0" grand suffers from a poor
> > impedance match at the cross-over, as do some of the Boston grands,
> > with a very wide belly across the back end. Flaring the bridge layout
> > would place note C#29 (the last note in the bass in the case of the
> > Welmar) closer to the rim, thereby raising the 'board impedance to a
> > more acceptable level. Of course, a more sensible solution might be
> > to redesign the piano with a narrower belly at the bass end. The
> > instrument might be less costly in materials, yet better in
> > performance.
>
> Yes, but then you would have that big soundboard to amplify the sound from
> the strings.
>
> Del
>