[pianotech] Whistlin' Wixey

[William Truitt]

>Do the comparative
> deviations you describe correspond directly to the the values of .5 degree
> to 1.5 degrees so often given as the values we want to achieve in a strung
> piano?  

That's right, the total angle.

Thanks for clarifying that, Ron.  Now I understand exactly what those values
mean, and that will give me the information I am looking for on my rebuilds
and other pianos.  

It's a total load resulting from the angle difference between 
the speaking length, and the rear "duplex" segments, 
regardless of what the front and rear angles are relative to 
the bridge top.

Also more understanding of what exactly it is.  Thanks again.

Will




-----Original Message-----
From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf
Of Ron Nossaman
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 7:38 AM
To: pianotech at ptg.org
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Whistlin' Wixey

William Truitt wrote:
> I would rather ask a stupid question than not ask the question that I
should
> be asking because I do not understand something.  

I agree.


>Do the comparative
> deviations you describe correspond directly to the the values of .5 degree
> to 1.5 degrees so often given as the values we want to achieve in a strung
> piano?  

That's right, the total angle.


> I understand that the loading of the board is the combination of both
front
> and rear bearing loads.  

It's a total load resulting from the angle difference between 
the speaking length, and the rear "duplex" segments, 
regardless of what the front and rear angles are relative to 
the bridge top.


>Still, Frank Emerson earlier gave an example on
> Baldwins with a significant mismatch between front and rear bearing where
it
> would be important to know.  For me, it is useful at this early juncture
in
> my bellyman career (I've only done 2 boards) to help me understand where
my
> feet are, and giving me the comfort that I have not built into the mix a
> serious mismatch between front and rear.  I'll take your point that we
> should not make it any more complicated than it needs to be otherwise.  

I try to keep front and rear bearing angles roughly equal, but 
it's really not all that critical. As long as there is a total 
bearing angle in the range you allow, without a negative front 
or rear angle, it'll be fine.
Ron N