---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment Tom One idea is that the least amount required to give totally effective damping is enough & more isn't better. The other idea is that certain arrangement of felts like those of S&S grands was initiated to perhaps miss a string node. I haven't found this to be so in practice I've tried many arrangements on Steinways & I personally like the four equally spaced pieces in the Mono-chords & first 2 bichords dampers for more effective damping then switching to a larger piece in front and smaller in the back similar to the original arrangement. In the tenor I find that an arrangement of tri-chord on the front & flat on the rear works well up to the treble break then flats. This has worked well with every grand I've done this to. Regards--Dale Tom writes I am replacing damper felts on a 1895 Kimball grand. I have noticed that older pianos like this one often have small damper felts (maybe 1/2 inch to 3/4 inch) situated at the ends of the damper heads with alot of space in the middle. I suppose that the idea here is that the smaller surface area increases the amount of downward pressure on the string, thereby increasing the dampening power. Therefore I'm inclined to duplicate the size and placement of the old damper felts. Agree/disagree? Then I got to thinking... If that rationale is true, why do most modern grands have longer damper felts in the midrange than they do at the treble? If the smaller area increases the amount of downward pressure, wouldn't the opposite be more efficient, assuming that the midrange strings generate more sustain and need more powerful damping? Any thoughts on this? Tom Sivak ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/e8/62/40/c4/attachment.htm ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC