Ok. I read you there. Let me carry this a tad further though for clarification of the issue. I should think that you could never increase the mass of a rim too much - except of course regarding cost considerations and/or possibly aesthetic consideration. I ask that from strictly an acoustical perspective. Isn't that what we want to do with a rim - immobilize the soundboard edge so that energy is not lost there. If that is true, then can I also assume that there is no acoustical difference between the spruce many-multi-piece outer rim of a Bosendorfer (aren't Bechsteins also like this? - perhaps others?) and a laminated bent maple rim common to many American pianos (assuming again that there is sufficient mass/stiffness to adequately immobilize the soundboard edge). Terry Farrell ----- Original Message ----- From: <A440A@AOL.COM> To: <pianotech@ptg.org> Sent: Sunday, March 03, 2002 9:42 AM Subject: Re: Chines and multi-piece rims > Terry writes: > >Regarding Ed's questions about the massiveness and/or stiffness of the > >rim, with solid timber sections of rim, is it not the case that all we > >would need to do is increase size of these timbers and/or add framing until > >we have whatever mass/stiffness we feel we need? > > I didn't mean to imply to more mass was better, I think I tend towards > maximum intergration of all the pieces. Let's keep in mind there are some > really nice sounding pianos out there with relatively light framing. Several > of the smaller Chickerings come to mind. > Regards, > Ed Foote
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC