---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
David wrote
I think there are those who when put to a rebuilding request by a
customer need to try and recreate a "Steinway sound" but might wish to
employ what has been represented as a more reliable method than CC. But
if the RC&S method produces its own unique characteristics and is, as
you say, something which certainly didn't sound like a Steinway, then it
would be good to know whether those differences are inherent in the
differences between the two methods or simply a matter of customizing a
particular design.
Hi Dave
>> I've been following this thread in my post convention fatigue.
I'd like to speak to this. I build rib crowned boards with some panel
compression support as well. These typically have slightly taller ribs & less
wide than the original.
I also have some compression in the panel. I typically dry to no less than
5.5% emc & no more than 6%.
I like this range for the results I'm getting & regional climate
conditions. It's not excessive by any means . I believe for my ears I like the sounds
of designs that retain some compression. I Use sitka spruce panels, which
Steinway does & some diaphramizing which they also do. The panels are similar in
thickness but on the thinner side. I press in a dished caul as they do. I
use the same scales with minor alterations. & Yes I like the tri-chord sound in
Ds.
I use primarily white Spruce ribs on the bottom and sometimes some Sitka
in the top treble(s) ie. Bs & Ds. Which they Don't. I no longer use sugar
pine except in some instances or in smaller pianos. Which they still do in ALL
models. I can hear the difference between a board ribbed with sugar pine & one
with spruce.
I market what I call a "variable radius soundboard" crown which means the
ribs are cut with increasingly steeper radius going into the treble & many
folks on this list & off do this. Most of this is not news & many use this.
My point is that all our bellied pianos sound to me like some of the best
Steinways I've heard even though they are built in this non traditional
way. I have fewer Killer octave problems & better balance of registers or as
good as the very best C.C. design at least . This point is the same as what
others are saying ,The methods are most reliable & predictable.
My point is,finally. To me These pianos aren't some derivation of the
Steinway sound but the best qualities of the Steinway sound. Great sustain,even
thru the breaks & treble areas, rich tone color, & power which isn't driven to
distortion & FFF levels.
I have no problem or difficulty selling my clients on these modern
features. When they hear it they get it. NO client has ever said no I don't want you
to do that & none ever said it didn't sound like a Steinway.
Ask any one who heard My D (at the PTG Cal State) last weekend if they
heard a Steinway Sound. Or the Concert artist who performed Gershwin ,who stopped
before the finale of Rhapsody in blue To State what an Amazing piano this
was & because of it he was performing his uncut version. It was a great
experience for me personally & I was gratified to have many enthusiastic words of
support from some other rebuilders, Technicians & friends.
I thank them all with mutual respect & support
Dale Erwin
I think Sarah pointed out what might be some
considerations in those differences. I can't address those issues with
any real knowledge as I am not an engineer and lack adequate experience.
But I can hear differences between different types of pianos and I am
interested in exploring the topic further even if it is only in a
speculative manner.
David Love
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
Erwins Pianos Restorations
4721 Parker Rd.
Modesto, Ca 95357
209-577-8397
Rebuilt Steinway , Mason &Hamlin Sales
www.Erwinspiano.com
---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/3c/e1/ea/c2/attachment.htm
---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC