<html> <head> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; = charset=us-ascii"> <meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 10 (filtered)"> <style>  </style> </head> <body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple> <div class=Section1> Is it thuddy all the way down or = just in the low bass?  Who made the strings and did the rescaling of the = bass?  When you rescaled the bass what kind of core wire dimension did you end = up with in the monos and how did the dimensions compare overall with the = original?  The original Steinway core dimensions on those are quite thick (.063 at = A0 often).  On pianos that I’ve had rescaled I’ve noticed = that the core wires ended up somewhat thinner and that double wraps were = added in the low bass.  These rescalings have always improved the tone at = the lower part of the piano.    <div> David Love davidlovepianos@comcast.net </div> -----Original = Message----- From: = caut-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces@ptg.org] On = Behalf Of Jim Busby Sent: Thursday, February = 09, 2006 11:22 AM To: College and University Technicians Subject: [CAUT] 1098 = slight redesign   List,   We just finished a restringing/slight redesign of a 1963 Steinway upright. =   1.       We ground down the “bump” and = lowered the pressure bar slightly. This made tuning a LOT better. Easier and more = stable. 2.       We shortened the apron on the bass bridge = (cantilever) to give 85mm (backscale) on the lowest bass note. It was 40mm. = 3.       It now has Pure Sound stainless wire. This = made the biggest difference. Richer, more stable. 4.       Added a small tenor bridge. I’m not sure = if this made much of a difference, but the break does seem to be smoother = and the bichords seem to have a slightly stronger fundamental. =   A side by side listen with = the same model showed vast improvements in the plain wire sections. I think this = was mainly due to the stainless wire. Also, it tunes like a dream now! = Removing the bump was easy and well worth it.   Although the piano is = improved, in some ways greatly, I still don’t like the bass. It’s better = than the old design but still a bit “thumpy”. Any = feedback??   I attached a = “before” picture and a close up of the bridge changes. The “bump” = area looks like the new 1098s so I didn’t take a picture of = that.   I highly recommend the “bump” removal and the Pure Sound wire. Jury’s still = out on the other changes.   Regards,   Jim Busby = BYU </div> </body> </html>