Let me jump in here...hopefully my brother Dale will too. The rebuilt "C" we brought to Rochester in 2006 has a RC&S board, and the tone in notes 68-76 got WAY better when we arced the line in, as Dale's pic showed. Whattup with THAT, Nossaman? Love and kisses....<g> DA On Feb 7, 2010, at 5:43 PM, PAULREVENKOJONES at aol.com wrote: > Let me also say, Ron, that I was speaking to the differences between > new soundboard installation with new hammers and what we find from > the factory. If it is indeed a difference between soundboard panel > construction, the evidence albeit being sketchy at best so far, it > is an interesting distinction and well worth studying. And my point, > again, was that factory production rarely allows for deviations from > straight lines, particularly in hammer production and installation. > Nor was I imputing a presumption on your part. Relax. > > Paul > > In a message dated 2/7/2010 7:16:15 P.M. Central Standard Time, rnossaman at cox.net > writes: > PAULREVENKOJONES at aol.com wrote: > > I would posit that it's factory work, whatever the soundboard panel > > structure. Efficient factory forefinishing has to presume much too > > consistent a belly structure. Thoughtful deviations from a > straight line > > require time and care. I don't think it's primarily the soundboard. > > Meaning that in all the RC&S soundboards you've installed, > you've never not had to deviate from a straight strike line? > I'm not talking about assuming anything at all. "Whatever the > soundboard structure" is the point, not factory presumption. > Ron N -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech.php/attachments/20100208/93d59325/attachment.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC