---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment I have been biting my tongue on this one, then I re-read the original=20 posting that said that any replies would be gratefully received.. so,=20= you asked for it... Several others have questioned the sense in rebuilding and "improving"=20= such an old heritage instrument. I'm firmly on that side of the fence. No matter how much it is "improved" or "butchered", (depending on your=20= perspective,) such an instrument can never become something it never=20 was. If someone wants a nice grand to play on, I suggest buying a=20 contemporary piano. It is a slippery slope to change the rib design,=20 just because we know more today than Bl=FCthner did 150 years ago. Just=20= because we CAN do it, doesn't mean we should. Where do you stop? =20 Restring with Mapes International Gold wire and nickel plated Denro=20 pins? Install a new back action and large dampers to finally stop=20 that annoying after-ring? Fit a new action with Tokiwa Turbo Wippens? =20= Imadegawa hammers perhaps?? Someone brought up the "oldest piano case=20= in the world". (Some way to go down in history as a piano=20 schmuck/tech!) I can see old Julius Bl=FCthner now, pounding his fists=20= onto the underside of his casket lid, shouting "no, NO", six feet=20 under. It behooves us to learn from such mistakes. Such an instrument should=20= stay in its original condition and live a collection where it is cared=20= for and available for study. If it were a Steinway from the same year,=20= there is no doubt Steinway would like to own it again. I would think=20 the Bl=FCthner family would be very interested in this specimen built by=20= their great ancestor. Admittedly opinionated, Jurgen Goering Piano Forte Supply (250) 754-2440 info@pianofortesupply.com http://www.pianofortesupply.com On Jan 21, 2006, at 8:17 AM, Ric Brekne wrote: > ... > I have this first year production Bluthner straight strung that I am=20= > getting ready to pull the soundboard out of. One of the options I am=20= > considering is to alter the ribbing system on this. The instrument=20 > measures about 195 cm, and has only 6 ribs. These are not very=20 > substantial ribs at that... The ribs are wide and short and get taller=20= > in the middle and have a _^ shape as opposed to a rounded shape.. =20 > 28mm wide, 9mm tall along their sides, 14 mm tall in the center. =20 > There is a long extra "rib" that runs roughly parallel to the bridge=20= > and crosses over the cross grain ribs as well. It measures 55 mm wide=20= > and 15mm tall. > > I suppose given the dimensions of the existing ribs this was a so=20 > called <<natural>> crowned board in its time (ie compression with flat=20= > ribs in a flat caul). My question is just how much beefing up of the=20= > system is advisable ? I am assuming the amount of downward force on=20= > the board was significantly less then present instruments have. I=20 > want to try and keep close to the origional sound picture these=20 > instruments had but at the same time I want the thing to be=20 > structurally strengthened (if necessary) and try and create a bit=20 > cleaner treble then fortes I have heard typically have. > > I could just pack the thing off to Bolduc and get a re-creation.... a=20= > nice easy option I suppose... but before I do that I wanted to hear=20 > what some of you think. > > I will be greatfull for any replies. > > Cheers > RicB ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 3346 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/e9/96/30/15/attachment.bin ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC