Michael, I admit to some confusion. If the scale the rebuilder sent you is the one actually on the instrument, why did they not rescale to begin with? Under whatever passes for normal circumstances in this business, I am not a great fan of arbitrarily rescaling. On the other hand, 10 unisons of anything (especially that high in the scale) probably should be looked into. (OK, lots and lots of exceptions of scales that work very, very well with long runs of gauge "x" wire - but, I think that most of these have runs of things like 18, or so, in the low to mid tenor.) So, from that perspective, one approach might be to take that _most_ odd top speaking length and simply see what the largest gauge is that will not break (assuming that this might be one of those cases where we discover the limits of reductive assessment). Then fill in with some reasonable mixture of 2 to 4 unisons each of progressively larger wire until you get down to around note 80 - 82, where the tension seems to be more reasonable. To your second question, I wonder about the instrument, itself. That is, while pretty much unheard of since the turn of the century, the 1870-1890 period saw huge amounts of experimentation that got out into (usually very limited) production. Prime examples of this would be the M&H DD, and the S&S "Missouri Class" (my moniker for the dozen or so 11 - 12' S&S instruments produced). No, I don't think it's one of those. My vote, to the extent that it is accurate at all, would be for something like a Chickering or Weber. Both of these companies produced pianos which, like the Thomas Organs of yesteryear, seem to have been engineered on the production line. So, that's sort of question one. Kinda. Another issue, virtually undiscussed these days, is the (to my mind) extreme difference between the wires available to us now, and the ones available even as late as the early 60s (to say nothing of the ones from pre-WWI). I am just old enough in the profession to have seen a fair number of 19th Cent. instruments (never in large supply on the West Coast) before they were, ah, "rebuilt". Part of my observations of these instruments is the incredible difference in the wire. I remember many instruments from this general period where, while maybe not choice one from a certain standpoint, it was possible to repin using the existing 100 year old wire. This wire was still flexible enough to be quite easily worked, new beckets bent, etc. This was particularly true on some Chickerings and Webers - thus my thoughts above. In specific regard to the issue of speaking length. While I do think that part of the answer lies with differences in the wire, my sense of this issue is that the figure of 2-1/8th" (which is, actually, a _outside_ limit figure) represents the outer limit of one variable of the equation that has to do with size, volume and quality of tone production, transducer (soundboard) response curves, etc., and, lest we forget, manufacturing costs. Others understand the engineering physics of this kind of thing much better than I. The above should be considered the idle ramblings of a befuddled mind with a presently insufficient supply of caffeine. A situation which I intend to rectify immediately. So, Michael, whatkindapianoisitanyway? Best. Horace Horace Greeley, CNA, MCP, RPT Systems Analyst/Engineer Controller's Office Stanford University email: hgreeley@leland.stanford.edu voice mail: 650.725.9062 fax: 650.725.8014
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC