Hi, Susan, At 05:41 PM 1/7/2011, you wrote: >Hi, Horace > >So really what they were dipped in was wax solid at room temperature, >instead of what we'd usually call mineral oil, with the addition of a >little bit of whale oil in the last stage of manufacture? Basically, yes. >Was the hot wax dip done before the bushings were put in, and the whale >oil after? Look at it from a manufacturing standpoint...only the flanges were dipped...so, there weren't any bushings. As noted, whale oil came very late in the process. >Do you think that various lubricants added later in the field worsen the >situation? I remember a piano in Stockton, which I tried to keep >going till the >owner could afford new parts (after moving to Hawaii .. given the cost >of moving to Hawaii, one sees a certain order in her priorities.) From what I've seen so far, while lubricants _may_ ameliorate some of the issues, it's basically putting a cover over something that needs to be buried. >I used the "zapper" to get the thing moving again -- it was pretty well >stationary, and a dark walnut brown. Oily substance bubbled and sizzled out >of the flanges. Yup...and, would continue to until the wood is thoroughly dried out or catches fire. >I presume this was almost certainly a mixture of lubricants added at various >times in attempts to keep the piano working. That's my impression. >If only the wippen support flanges and the hammer flanges were dipped, then >presumably if the paraffin worsened the verdigris, the other two center pins >in the action (and those in the back action, too) would have been relatively >free of it, unless the piano was "tropicalized"? Usually; although, at that point, we also get into the question of what role the lanolin in the cloth bushing may have had in interacting with the brass of the center pin... >I remember seeing a Packard upright from the deep south. It was a mess, from >various attempts to deal with sluggish hammers -- repeated lubrication turning >everything to gum till the hammers stood in air, and then someone doused it >with alcohol, causing the leathers to shrink and warp and turn to rocks. But >the other centers were perfectly all right, which led me to think that this >was "tuner damage." Precisely. That said, I think that almost all of us have instruments out there of which we are (at the very least) less than proud. I've got some real stinkers I'd like to have back, if for no other reason than to set fire to them. What matters, I think, is what we learn from a given situation and how we incorporate whatever that learning might be into our future work and understanding. Best. Horace >Susan > >On 1/7/2011 4:59 PM, Horace Greeley wrote: >> >>Hi, >> >>Sorry...just catching up on this. >> >>At 04:12 PM 1/7/2011, you wrote: >>>On 1/7/2011 3:54 PM, Ed Sutton wrote: >>>>This fron Allen Wright in London, concerning whether he finds >>>>verdigris in European-made Steinways: >>>> >>>>"actually no, I don't, now that you mention it." >>> >>>Presumably, they never dipped the flanges in tallow? >> >>The tallow thing is a very long-standing myth. Except in very >>small amounts to lubricate springs, tallow (either sheep or bear) >>was not used in the action department. While tallow was used >>(bear, when available) was much earlier in production and was used >>in the trapwork. Tallow not only gums up quickly, but also >>leaves interesting odors as it decays...try mixing up a batch of >>tallow and paraffin wax in a pot on your kitchen stove and letting >>is simmer for a few days. >> >>Paraffin came to be used in what someone appropriately noted as >>S&S' continual search for tight, low-friction bearing >>surfaces. The buckets into which parts (flanges only, unless the >>piano was being "tropicalized") were dipped were filled with melted >>paraffin wax, which was not mixed with tallow. As the action/piano >>reached the end of final tone regulation, a minute amount of whale >>oil was added to the hammer and wippen support flanges. >> >>Reading through this thread, it seems to me that the chronology of >>use of different solutions, chemicals, and procedures for center >>pinning and related issues supports the idea that S&S, among >>others, was looking for ways to compensate with a target that was >>(and is) moving through at least four dimensions. After WWII, the >>quality of a variety of materials essential to making pianos "the >>way they used to" either diminished or evaporated. Most makers of >>the period of the 50's and 60's were dealing with bushing cloth >>that was clearly pretty substandard (wool felt and cloth with less >>lanolin, no whale oil, wood that no longer really met traditional >>specifications, etc). Even some of the attempts made in Europe >>(one thinks of graphite impregnated cloth) weren't all that >>successful. So, it's not all that far afield to think that folks >>were scrambling to try to find substitutes so that they could stay in business. >> >>Earlier in the discussion either Fred Sturm or Ed Sutton noted the >>differences between differing kinds of parrafin. As I think was >>noted then, there is (once again) so much cross-use of the same >>term to describe various materials that it can all become a big >>muddle. One quick review is the one in the Wikipedia at: >> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraffin >> >>Best. >> >>Horace >> >> >
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC