<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" = xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" = xmlns:st1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" = xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"> <head> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; = charset=us-ascii"> <meta name=ProgId content=Word.Document> <meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 10"> <meta name=Originator content="Microsoft Word 10"> <link rel=File-List href="cid:filelist.xml@01C396E2.BAC6C570"> <o:SmartTagType = namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="PersonName"/>  <style>  </style>  </head> <body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple = style='tab-interval:.5in'> <div class=Section1> So I guess my = narrowed question is, given all of these excellent posts, is:  With a new B, should I increase the angle and = slightly narrow the bar on the speaking length side, given everything else I have tried? =  Is there some consensus, given = the problems with the design?  = And how do I determine if I have a “soft” V-bar?  Voicing did nothing permanent = but continue to weaken the piano.  = I plan to call Steinway first before I do anything further.  This owner of a new B is = currently, officially, depressed  ;  ) <o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> I may first experiment with yarn in = the duplex and PVCE glue on that segment, before shaping the bar.  <o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> <div> <st1:PersonName>Lance Lafargue</st1:PersonName>, RPT<o:p></o:p> LAFARGUE = PIANOS<o:p></o:p> New Orleans = Chapter, PTG<o:p></o:p> 985.72P.IANO<o:p><= /o:p> lancelafargue@bell= south.net<o:p></o:p> </div> <o:p> </o:p> -----Original = Message----- From: = caut-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces@ptg.org] On = Behalf Of Horace Greeley Sent: Saturday, October = 18, 2003 11:02 PM To: College and = University Technicians Subject: Re: Capo = Buzz <o:p> </o:p> Ron, At 09:47 PM 10/18/2003 +1100, you wrote: <![if !supportLineBreakNewLine]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> At 7:22 PM -0400 18/10/03, Ed Sutton = wrote: <![if !supportLineBreakNewLine]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p>   . . . Within the constraints of the S & S design, there are 3 causes = of buzz: poorly shaped capo, capo bruised by rough stringing, capo too soft = due to failure to case harden in casting.<o:p></o:p> Plus the fallacious practice of attempting to set the font duplex length = to a harmonic of the speaking length.<o:p></o:p> I totally agree with your assessment; and think that this practice has = to do with a basic misunderstanding of what the front duplex is supposed to = do.  The patent drawings help support this assumption.  I do not = remember the patent descriptions sufficiently well to know if they confirm or refute = what might be construed from the pictures as being a reinforcing = system.  This is further complicated, I think, by the presence of the movable cast = front duplexes still seen on so many older S&S pianos. I'm sure that there are others on the list who are much more current = with this stuff than myself...maybe they'll speak up. Best. Horace P.S. - Almost forgot, I've heard some very good compliments about an = instrument of yours that a friend of mine heard in Syndey...Opera House, = maybe?  Good Show!!! hg <![if !supportLineBreakNewLine]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> </div> </body> </html>