Hi Jim, I share your bafflement. I have heard the same things from various Steinway techs - "as long as it's firm, friction doesn't matter." I agree with Jeff, Ed, Horace and others. In my experience, friction does matter, and I want 4 to 8 grams in my shank centers (paying attention to ambiant humidity at the time). I do a lot of top action repinning as a matter of standard up-keep. Typically every year or two for a performance instrument. I find this makes a big difference to sound production, responsiveness, control, nuance, function (helps a lot in the checking versus rep spring strength balancing act). So I am puzzled when I hear the opposite view from techs I respect. My sense is this is possibly a matter of tail wagging dog. When teflon was abandoned, instead of going back to regular old felt, Steinway went to this felt impregnated with Emralon, Permalon, or whatever it is exactly. I have the feeling this was partly a production driven innovation (aimed at more consistency with less labor), with the idea that it would also lead to improvement in function. With this impregnation, the felt can be more variable in density and fit, and the "plastic substance" makes the bushing longer lasting and less liable to humidity fluctuation. It is also readily soluble, so you just dose with methanol to free or (at least sometimes) firm up the center. And there is the shock absorbing attribute of felt as an improvement over the teflon. All sounds great in theory. But in practice it becomes difficult to impossible to come up with free movement plus standard parameters of friction under production conditions. Regular felt bushings are fit to standards by controlling density and thickness of the felt used, and then by applying an appropriate shrinking formula after pinning. Shrinking formulas don't work with felt impregnated with "plastic substance." The felt is no longer controllable, except by reaming, which is too labor-intensive for factory application. So they have to make sure the felt is thin (or lacking density) enough to be free, and fill in the gaps with the plastic. Meaning there is no possibility for achieving what most of us agree is optimum friction parameters. Though they _can_ achieve good firmness with low friction consistently. Result being that, decisions having been made and production facilities long since adapted, they try to make the best of it. At least that's how I read it. I'd be very interested to hear what Eric has to say. As it happens, I'm heading to NYC for a week long seminar the end of October, and this whole question was high on my list of things to query. Eric says he won't be there (he'll be on the competition circuit somewhere), so I'll ask Kent and whoever else is available and see what they have to say. This question is similar to the whole hammer treatment issue (especially Ron Coners saying the only part of the hammer that matters is the crown, and limiting what is done to 3:1 lacquer and single needles deep into the crown, along with occasional application of keytop). I hear what they are saying, and hesitate to reject it outright, but I just can't seem to digest it. Doesn't compute. Doesn't fit with my experience. On the other hand, the C & A department in NYC is dealing with, and satisfying, the cream of the cream pianists, day after day, year after year. Who am I to argue? It's a quandary. Regards, Fred Sturm University of New Mexico --On Saturday, September 27, 2003 7:43 PM -0600 Jim Busby <jim_busby@byu.edu> wrote: > > > David, > > > > You may be right about the capstans and knuckles, but once again it means > changing a new instrument x 8. Eric Schandall is coming out next week and > I'll push him hard on this. Let's see what he says. I was told by "a > competitor" that concert artists will never like them as is, but if this > is what Steinway C & A is doing I can't really buy that either. > > > > As far as side play goes they really do seem tight. (no excess sideplay) > But the things swing all day long! If this indeed works, then all the PTG > literature, articles, etc. about friction are in question. Or maybe there > really are two types of pianos; S & S, and everyone else. > > > > > > Jim Busby >
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC