CRESCENDO GRAND PUNCHINGS

[Jeannie Grassi]

Hi Dave,
I may drop in to visit a young friend (Eric Sutherland) at Manhattan when
I'm in the city next week.  Any chance you might be around...just to say Hi
and connect a face with a name?
jeannie

Jeannie Grassi, RPT
Assistant Editor, Piano Technicians Journal
mailto:jcgrassi@earthlink.net


-----Original Message-----
From: pianotech-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org] On Behalf
Of David Skolnik
Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 7:37 AM
To: David C. Stanwood; Pianotech
Subject: RE: CRESCENDO GRAND PUNCHINGS

Hi Dave -
Sorry not to be there with you.  Then again, I'm sorry not to be there when 
you're on the Vineyard too.  Anyway, I'll take a chance with this, even 
though I've yet to read Andre's article.  I've used two sets of these and I 
find them interesting to work with, though I haven't done any sort of 
controlled test to see if I could discern any tonal difference.  But here 
are my theoretical questions regarding your comments:

You say
>Woven felt is the technical choice for high impact areas because it 
>greatly reduces compaction of the felt over time.

As a generalization that may be true, but doesn't it depend upon the 
initial density of both materials, as well as the level of force, over what 
period of time?

>  Over time, pressed felt will compact more quickly than woven felt 
> causing dimensional changes which will effect regulation and it will get 
> harder faster than woven felt when exposed to repeated high impact.

The four functions of whatever material used in this application are to 
absorb shock, suppress noise, define a precise termination of movement, and 
to remain stabile.  These functions tend to be achieved in compromise, and 
to the varied preference of the performer.  Even with woven punchings, you 
assume regulation will be necessary at a frequency depending upon 
usage.  These conical punchings start out much less compressible than most 
woven punchings I've seen.  That might make them unsatisfactory to someone 
used to a more cushioned stop.  I would think that, initially, the woven 
punchings would change much more than these, also becoming harder.  Is 
there any reason to think that these punchings will react hygroscopically 
more than the woven  variety?  It would seem to me that the reason this 
material is unsuitable for the back rail is not for any dimensional 
instability but rather its inadequate noise abatement.  The more I say, the 
more I suspect I should read the article.

Posting any pictures of Holland, are you?

Regards-

David Skolnik



At 11:32 AM 5/7/2005 +0200, you wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>I'm always very interested when the discussion turns towards felt.  Being 
>married to a feltmaker has given me a deeper insight into the science and 
>nature of wool felts.   I've devoted years to the studying felt making 
>felt and experimenting with felt.  Many of you may remember many of the 
>PTG classes I used to give on the science of felt and how I promoted in 
>the 1980's a return to cold pressed hammers and the use of finer quality 
>fiber in piano hammers.   I'm excited to see a renewed interest in 
>improving fiber quality and production methods for piano hammers.  I love 
>the cold pressed Wurzen felt hammers made by Ronson.  However.......
>
>I'm here in Holland at the shop of Frans Pietjouw and I'm looking very 
>skeptically at one of these conical punchings.  I'm struck by the fact 
>that they are made from presssed felt and not woven felt.   Woven felt is 
>the technical choice for high impact areas because it greatly reduces 
>compaction of the felt over time.   That is why it is ALWAYS used for back 
>rail cloth, balance rail, and for front rail punchings.
>
>I would never recommend the use of this type of felt on the front rail 
>because it is a high impact area.  Using pressed felt in this area is 
>technically the wrong choice.  Over time, pressed felt will compact more 
>quickly than woven felt causing dimensional changes which will effect 
>regulation and it will get harder faster than woven felt when exposed to 
>repeated high impact.
>
>I have also just tried out these punchings in a very beautiful vintage 
>Steinway A which is in the shop down stairs and I notice no difference 
>whatsoever in sound when changing from original new Steinway punchings to 
>the conical punchings.  I know that a sample of one means nothing 
>statistically and this is only one example but there it is.
>
>David Stanwood
>_______________________________________________
>pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives


_______________________________________________
pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives