Just to chime in here a bit. I've heard some old Steinways for example that still sounded quite good and the grain wasn't particularly tight and vice versa. I've heard various newer European pianos including Steingraebber, Petrof, Fazioli, , Hamburg Steinway, Feurich. All had very consistent looking boards with tight grain, nice workmanship. Some sounded very nice and some, honestly, were disappointing especially through the treble section. There's clearly more going on. Wider grain doesn't seem to preclude achieving requisite stiffness nor does close grain guarantee it. On my own boards I've produced some using quite wide grain (5-8 per inch) that sounded just fine and I've used tighter grain as well with good results. All of these were rib crowned and supported, very little compression (6% emc at glue up). I don't think I've done any using the very dense heartwood so can't comment there. I'd be curious what those who build rib crowned and supported boards shoot for in terms of GPI. David Love www.davidlovepianos.com From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of erwinspiano at aol.com Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 8:26 AM To: pianotech at ptg.org Subject: Re: [pianotech] #2 Soundboard Wood Hi Ron Ok. SO just to be clear ... I am NOT saying tight grain is a requirement only that I personally like the sounds of the boards that do. Tonal envelope ie. Sustain seems clear & enviable to my ears And... many piano builders get there sound in different ways. This may indeed be informative to some to know that tight wood seems part of their recipe whatever they may believe about the magic wood theory. While on the grain subject, Manufacturers apparently have different spec on wood grain. Two of I know.... Steinway NY wants 14 to 16 grains an inch & Stwy Hamburg wants 18 & higher. Stwy NY are still C.C. crowners. Hamburg has a radius rib of some kind & yet desire tighter grain. Another point is that the wood itself has some impedance qualities. OR low density wood or high density wood. I think any body can make a case for either using whatever design or model. Having used many variety's of spruces, to my ears Sitka gives a sound I am most attracted to. Interestingly it has the highest weight to strength ratio. I recently played a 7 ft Steingraebber at David Andersen. I don't play well but this thing sucked the music out of my finger tips. It was ethereal & glorious. If I had money I would have bought the piano quit my job & taken piano lesson. Truly my tonal pocket. Very tight grain panel. 25 per inch. By the way.. I have this reaction to all the Steingraebbers I've played. Interestingly, speaking to UDO Steingraebber last year,said they glue there bridge on first in some form of curved caul to the board obviously subscribing to the theory of the bridge being a long supporting member(or double crowning) Then the ribs go on. I don't know if crowned or flat. Petrof does the same thing. This idea has been lambasted here on this list time and again and yet here are these pianos that blow my ears off. As an objective listener observer I pay attention to these things. I think we all should. The merits of rib crowned & supported boards have incredible merit as do rib crowned boards. Either to my mind will hold up longer & produce to my ear a incredible sound envelope. Yes, I subscribe to the idea of intelligent (rib) design, wholeheartedly...lol... .but There are many legitimate forms of soundboard construction discussed on this list generously shared by many. I appreciate it. Other folks around the world have different way of getting the same or equally amazing results using other methods I pay attention to. Best Dale By the way both bellies at Rochester, My D & David A.s Stwy C were tight grained panels. The D with more compression. The C, rib crowned & supported. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech_ptg.org/attachments/20090313/83b8db61/attachment.html>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC