Delwin D Fandrich wrote: > >/On reflection I suspect this was because the initial load support came >entirely from compression within the soundboard panel while the ribs (though >lightly crowned they were also moderately bent as in a compression-crowned >soundboard system) were actually working to straighten the panel. / > This part I've heard before... and still scratch my head about... tho the useage of the word "support" may be the clue to my ponderments. >/Once the >ribs reached their neutral configuration they began helping the compressed >panel in supporting the load rather than fighting it, hence increasing the >spring rate of the system./ > > But this is not something I've heard before. In essence a declaration that ribs do indeed (at some point) help in supporting the load.... in a CC board. Tho why should his support suddenly exist as soon as the ribs are flat instead of being there all the time (perhaps countered by the tendancies of the ribs to straighten to a lessening degree as said ribs approach becomming straight). >>I thought your >>position was that >>there is essentially no difference in behavior or performance >>between an RC >>and a CC board. >> >>Phil Ford >> >> > >Not quite. It is my position that soundboard systems of both types can be >made to sound essentially the same. At least initially. Their behavior and >performance may well be different, especially as time goes by. > >Del > > > >
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC