Dale, Not to make any new points as to what the tonebell nosebolt does, as I have already done so, but a couple of interesting items. Mehlin and Sons uses the exact same nosebolt, or at least it appears so, in the corresponding place on their larger grands and in the same manner. The plate, as others note, is substantially different than a that on a Steinway suggesting some reason to question the observation that the bolt "mass-couples" the rim to the plate. Were this the case one would think that the difference in plate and rim of Steinway and Mehlin would suggest a different "mass-coupling". Yet, the one seen in Mehlins are virtually identical to those of Steinway and, indeed, to my eye, appear to have been produced by the same factory. Incidentally, the larger, 6'4" Mehlin grand is, to my ear, another one of the number of great, unrecognized American pianos. I have not seen the nosebolt of the smaller c. 5 and 1/2 ft grand. Haynes uses a metallic nosebolt not at all similar to those used on Steinway and Mehlin and attached passing similarly through the plate yet attached not to the rim but to the bellyrail. They use this even of their 5' 7" piano. Finally, just yesterday I looked at an old Kimball upright which had a similar stiffener comprised of an, apparently cast, metallic strip, perhaps an inch or so wide and rather thick, and containing a patent number, which extended on the back side of the soundboard downward from an attachment into the back of the piano where the soundboard is glued in. I would hazard a guess that this pieces passes into the back here for a substantial distance. It extends about eight or so inches, according to a most cursory glance, downward from its attachment into the back at the top of the board, and then supports a nut on a bolt which passes transversely to it into a hole and through the soundboard, and, presumably, into the plate. . I didn't take the time to open the case and look at the fastening method to the plate but assume it is similar to the bolt in the Steinway "bell". I will see the piano again in a few days and may have more observations. Were one to take the number and read the patent, which I can provide I would almost be willing to bet money that it will be seen in the description that the device is simply to stabilize the plate, or, perhaps, allow a slight adjustment to follow the moving board over time, their claims being similar to Steinway in this regard. No mention will be found of "mass-coupling" the rim and plate. I still can't imagine these types of nosebolts as having much effect on sustain unless they were used to compensate for downbearing changes. Were the plate set correctly, the bridge planed well, and the bearing acceptable, I don't believe it would make a significant difference. However, as has been discussed here in great detail, the board in this area may subsequently move, perhaps significantly affecting downbearing. These devices would then afford the technician the option of carefully increasing the bearing locally while allowing avoidance of the difficult, global approach of having to reset the plate or recap the bridge. Of course, this could be achieved in some systems, at least for the rear bearing by changing the string rest or plate. Regards, Robin Hufford >
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC