has anyone ever tried this?

[Rob & Helen Goodale]

I think there are a variety of factors at play in terms of string 
stabilization.  Yes, the wire does stretch.  There is a degree of elasticity 
or "springiness" that has to be overcome before the string says to it's 
lovely metallic neighbors, "Okay, I'm all stretched out now".  (How's that 
for drama?)  Secondly, there are equalization points that have to settle. 
These include the curving through the bridge pins, the U-bend around the 
hitch pin, and the friction around the capo or agraff.  If there is a duplex 
segment then there is yet another friction point to settle.  Finally, the 
coil on the pin itself will snug up.  I have replaced many-a-string and no 
matter how hard I try I just cant get the wire to make the perfect right 
angle into the pin hole.  There is always this slight gap.  Yet months later 
the becket is snuggled up nice and tight because the string formed itself 
around the bend all by itself over time.  So there you have it, Rob's 
philosophical ramblings of string stability.

Rob Goodale, RPT
Las Vegas, NV


>I sent this yesterday, but don't know if it went through.  So here it is 
>again.
>
> On 11/7/07, Ron Nossaman <rnossaman at cox.net> wrote:
>
>> In other words, it's the bends.
>
> OK, I'll ask questions because I can't observe a new string right now
> in order to answer this experimentally.
>
> So if it is all in the bends, theoretically one could fully stabilize
> a string at one session, right?  I haven't ever tried to verify that
> because I've been told for years that it *always* takes time for
> stabilization to occur.  (I.e., because the wire is stretching.  Maybe
> I need to occasionally switch out of lemming mode.  "But my mentor
> said....")
>
> It follows that if stabilization is immediately possible, why does it
> take up to a year for strings to stabilize in a new piano?  Is it
> because the cost of labor to stabilize would outweigh the benefit of
> immediate stabilization?
>
> JF
>
>