>Yes, I would imagine it would put more pressure on the agraffes. The load on the agraffes is determined by the string tension and string angles at the agraffes. I don't see why these should need to be different for this configuration, but perhaps they are. > This piano >had a new block and strings since the late 70's. and has always been at >A-440 since then even though the piano was built in 1901 in Boston. Just >wondered what benefits there would be for this conjuration. All else is >normal. >James Grebe Since I haven't seen this piano (or a photo) I can't say for sure, but I would imagine the angle of the block mimics the angle of the string coming off the back of the agraffe. The strings could make a direct path from the agraffes to the tuning pins. So, there wouldn't need to be an additional pressure point (friction point) as there is in a configuration where the block is parallel to the string plane. In theory this would make the piano easier to tune and would make it easier to equalize tension on the string (one less friction point). It also means that you don't have a front aliquot, which may or may not be a good thing, depending on your point of view. Phil Ford PS Some photos would be nice. > >> Hi James, >> >> I (and wife and daughter) was recently over at Cunningham piano and >> Rich showed us an old (late 1800s) Steinway they had rebuilt. Its >> pinblock and plate were slanted upward from the agraffes. He didn't say >> why they built it that way, but didn't mention it put extra pressure on > > the agraffes. > > - John >> > > > The pin portion of the plate slants back before the agraffes about 20% > > > James Grebe
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC