Makes total sense Del, thanks for that. It's not as if there wasn't plenty of space available on the pinblock, to have had half the bichord tuning pins a little further over. It would make perfect sense if on the original pattern, they were! Unless someone had a theoretical bee in his bonnet about keeping the string straight as it went through the agraffe. But having the tuning pin further over by a millimeter would not introduce much of a bend at the agraffe hole. As Jurgen pointed out though, here we are in 2012 with the piano still going (reasonably) strong. So, by no means a disater, in the end! Best regards, David. www.davidboyce.co.uk > From a design perspective it is not OK to have a string resting > against the coil of a neighboring string. But this may not have > started out as a design issue. > > These holes would have been indexed in one of two ways: either > "dimples" were located in the original frame pattern or they were > drilled using a drilling template of some sort. In either case errors > were common over a production run. Pattern repairs were made by > patternmakers whose knowledge of the overall piano was probably > limited. He would have little knowledge (or concern) over a row of > dimples moving a millimeter one way or another. And that's all it > would take to produce this error. > > Or the worker who made the drilling template could well have made it > slightly out of spec. > > In either case the problem would not discovered until this piano, and > a few dozen (or a few hundred) others, were well into production. And > then it would take some while and a lot more work for the problem to > get fixed. > > ddf > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20120330/c90bdcd0/attachment.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC