Rear Duplex Bars on Steinways:

[Greg Newell]

---------------------- multipart/mixed attachment

Ron and David,
         Well guys, you are most certainly not alone. I'm just finishing up=
=20
an action, damper, and lyre rebuild job on a "D". Since I used all Renner=20
parts I wonder if the college I'm doing this for would mind terribly if I=20
scraped all the Steinway decals off?

Greg Newell


At 02:51 PM 5/10/2003, you wrote:


>>That's an interesting statement.   I wonder how Steinway would interpret
>>that.  In other words, this piano can sound better, but let's leave it
>>sounding less good so that it's more like a Steinway.
>>
>>David Love
>>
>>
>> > How far can a Steinway get its sound
>> > improved without sounding like something other than a Steinway?
>> > Ed Foote RPT
>
>
>That's a good question, Ed. Let's find out. But why all this focus on=20
>Steinway? The one single and most important point that nearly everyone is=
=20
>ignoring here is that this stuff is not about Steinway at all. It's about=
=20
>improving performance of just about any piano out there, provided there is=
=20
>a minimum structure to work with in the first place. How far can a Kimball=
=20
>get it's sound improved without sounding like something other than a=20
>Kimball? Again, let's find out. We're trying to make whatever piano we are=
=20
>working with be the best sounding piano it can be by our efforts. This=20
>stuff works on pianos, not just on Steinways, and has nothing whatsoever=20
>to do with reverential awe of any monolithic object other than the beauty=
=20
>of discovery of some of the science behind what makes a piano work - or=20
>not work, and the practical application of those principals in making as=20
>musical a sound as possible come out of any given piano. This is=20
>fundamental working knowledge, folks, not a smoke and mirrors entrenched=20
>belief without practical experience or understanding, and there's still a=
=20
>whole lot to discover and learn to use in that pursuit. Progress in=20
>anything requires not only adding to existing knowledge, but leaving=20
>behind past truths that have proven not to be the benefit they were once=20
>thought to be. This is difficult for most of us because we have invested a=
=20
>lot of blood and sweat into trying to learn to deal with these existing=20
>warts, even to the point of assigning the least improvable of them the=20
>status of "character" to relieve ourselves of further responsibility in=20
>fixing them. But we find we can fix a lot of them by letting them go and=20
>replacing them with something more mechanically and acoustically workable.=
=20
>This requires an open mind and the willingness to evolve as new=20
>information becomes available. That's the tough part. Focusing on one=20
>sacred relic to the exclusion of all other conflicting evidence is not a=20
>growth attitude.
>
>But that's just what I think.
>
>Ron N
>
>_______________________________________________
>pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives
>

Greg Newell
Greg's piano Fort=E9
mailto:gnewell@ameritech.net=20

---------------------- multipart/mixed attachment--