Hi Horace, I guess I hadn't expected that after they introduced the CNC machine for prepping keybeds that it would go unused periodically. Interesting, though not surprising. I crown the key level as I see no down side to the process, it's no more difficult than a flat keyboard, and I like the aesthetic. The rest of your email regarding S&S NY I find spot on. Kindest Regards, William R. Monroe On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 6:37 AM, Horace Greeley <hgreeley at sonic.net> wrote: > > Hi, William, > > At 06:00 AM 10/13/2010, you wrote: > > Hi Paul, > > I would respectfully disagree. When at the factory three years ago (and > this spring) we looked at the CNC machine that does the cutting to radius > the key bed. It was still done then, and I've heard nothing to the contrary > in the past three years. FYI. > > > Yes. The problem is that, as I think I've noted elsewhere, this is simply > one more instance in which S&S is consistently predictable in their > inconsistency. That is, from a certain point of view, using CNC devices to > do the rough cutting of keybeds at some point in their manufacturing process > is one thing. It's quite another to change manufacturing processes (e.g., > not necessarily _design standards_) in ways which materially affect > as-built standards. Those kinds of changes are notable if one looks at > enough instruments over a long enough period of time...especially when one > has to re-engineer whatever has happened on the line in order to figure out > what may/may not be going on with a specific piano. By that, I mean that, > from a certain point of view, it really doesn't matter how the cabinet work > is done if the end result is consistent inconsistency with regard to the > product - and, there's been plenty of that over a very long time in the > specific are of forefinishing. > > And, yes, I've seen the CNC machines in operation in Astoria; and I've also > seen them sitting quiet, obviously not in use. It's really had a great deal > to do with who has been in charge of manufacturing at any given time over > the years. Further, let's please not forget that an issue of increasing > seriousness to many manufacturers, especially ones in the piano business > over the last 60 years or so, is the paucity of real cabinet makers coming > through the doors seeking employment. > > Putting aside much of the above, though, because it really obfuscates what > we're talking about, the issue with the keybed and how that affects key > leveling has to do with the whole forefinishing process. And, as critical > as that area is to Steinway, they are still having real problems with > getting much consistency with the whole process. Beds and keyframes come > through all over the place...often being planar where they should be > concave, concave where they should be convex...etc. In that context, I > fully concur with Ron (and others) that building a crown into the key > height, however rewarding it may be from a standpoint of ego or technical > competency is simply not noticed with sufficient frequency. Does that mean > I don't do it? Of course not. It just means I'm quite realistic about why > I'm doing it and for whom. > > Best regards. > > Horace > > > > William R. Monroe > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech.php/attachments/20101014/e6d7de74/attachment.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC