When adding transition bridges on these boards have you found it worthwhile to consider altering the strike point in the transition section? David Love www.davidlovepianos.com -----Original Message----- From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Ron Nossaman Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2009 1:51 PM To: pianotech at ptg.org Subject: Re: [pianotech] finding the strike line Gene Nelson wrote: > Hello list, > I am curious if anyone uses a math model for finding the strike line and > arrives at a line that gives the best tone. Hi Gene, No mathematical model really works to any precision for a number of reasons, most not realistically measurable. Like Dale said, it's by ear. The higher in the scale you go, the more critical the strike point becomes, in general. Dale mentioned the bridge line, and that certainly has something to do with it, but I'm finding the soundboard response is a bigger factor. In the high compression boards we've all worked on these many years, the strike point producing optimal tone in the top third of the scale rarely produces a straight line. In a good RC&S board, even when the speaking length progressions aren't significantly different from the original, the strike point target gets much wider, and deviations from optimal through the killer octave range become much harder to discern. I find that with my RC&S boards, I can just hang a straight strike line through the top third and not lose enough to be worth the trouble to custom fit the strike line every third note. The more of these boards I build, the more amazed I am at how very many of the problems we take for granted as something we have to work hammers around with a conventional soundboard assembly through the top half of the scale are predominately soundboard inefficiencies. I know, that's just WRONG by everyone's experience - until they work on a few RC&S boards and start noticing differences. My take, Ron N
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC