<html> <body> Bill - Thanks for the additional information.  I'd be curious to read and / or see what you have, if I can ever get myself to a conference again.  Sorry to ask...what's LOL? David Skolnik At 01:53 AM 2/15/2004 -0500, you wrote: <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>David:   The agraffe-like hardware devices which you refer to were an important part of the "Centennial Grand".  I feature an 1875 "Style 5"  Centennial Grand in my "Early Steinway Grand" program.  The first-generation (early 1870's) front duplex had a very low draft angle, and included agraffes to the top of the piano.  On the first-generation front duplexing, the string front termination was at the agraffe, and the round hole may not have been effective at consistently leaking...maybe it was too good at clamping.....   The 1875 patent idea was the first front duplex system I know of to terminate the string with a round bar, and the first time the front duplexing looked at all like the modern Steinway.    It wasn't the first time Steinway introduced a duplexing idea with expensive hardware and later included the concept in simple plate casting later;  the first generation duplexing was introduced in the same way, with duplex inserts which design later became part of the casting.   Ask Webb to have me give the program at MARC when I come -LOL - the classes are all scheduled already - I have my theories about this stuff, some of which I blame on Del, but which he might distance himself from....Steinway's duplexing efforts in the 1870's are part of a little-observed, larger reality which should be brought to the fore and result in a revision of the history of piano technology.   It's sort of the climax of my "Early Steinway Grand" program....and possibly a yet-to-be-written journal article....and I believe it should have an impact on the history of piano technology, oh, lofty stuff...  Well, I'll have my laptop at MARC and would be happy to share some of the pics with you there if you're interested.   As for the initial question about capo/tasto/disastro nomenclature, hmmm....can't say I've cleared the waters any, though you've pointed to CFT's use of the terms...   Bill Shull         In a message dated 2/14/2004 7:49:27 PM Pacific Standard Time, davidskolnik@optonline.net writes: <dl> <dd>Garret & others, <dd>The recent discussion titled "Capo bars", which extended from 1/28 to 2/02, was attempting to address both etymology and consistency of nomenclature.  Of the first I have nothing to add, however, looking into the second proved illuminating. <dd>At 04:11 PM 1/31/2004 -0500, Garret wrote: <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite> <dd>Del wrote: There is a drawing in one of my PT Journal articles illustrating what I mean. <dd>Does someone know off hand what PT Journal issue that was? <dd>Garret</blockquote> <dd>You may have already found this information, but I don't see that anyone replied to your request on list.  I believe the article Del was referring to was in the August 1995 issue, titled "The Designer's Notebook-- Front Duplex Stringing Scales".  This was a second installment, the first having appeared in the June issue, and both being in response to a round-table discussion regarding capo d'astros which appeared in the February 1995 issue. <dd>There seems to be some confusion regarding the term capo d'astro and capo tastro.  I hadn't previously come across capo tastro, <dd>and, in any case, the element seems most often simply referred to as "capo bar".  <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite> <dd>Delwin D Fandrich <fandrich@pianobuilders.com> wrote: <dd>The capo tastro bar and the V-bar are two different things even if they are most often part of the same casting. The capo-tastro bar is formed in the bottom part of the mold, the V-bar in the top. </blockquote> <dd>Vince Myrkalo then asked: <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite> <dd>Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 17:47:26 -0800 (PST) <dd>From: madelyn mrykalo <madvinmryk@yahoo.com> <dd>Subject: RE: Capo bars <dd>Is there a difference between capo tastro and capo d'astro?</blockquote> <dd>and Del (I think) sent the following: <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite> <dd>Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2004 08:25:13 -0800 <dd>From: Delwin D Fandrich <fandrich@pianobuilders.com> <dd>Subject: RE: Capo bars</blockquote> <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite> <dd>According to Giraffes, Black Dragons, and Other Pianos by Edwin M. Good (Second Edition, 2001. Published by the Stanford University Press, ), capo d' astro is essentially a meaningless term (at least as applied to the piano) meaning "cap of the star." In other words it was a marketing term. Capo tastro is Italian for "cap of the key" which at least has some relationship to a component of the piano. Probably a more meaningful term would be "capotasto," also from Italian, meaning "head of the fingerboard." (According to the Merriam-Webster 11th Collegiate Dictionary.)</blockquote> <dd>I found the Steinway patent # 170,646 (C.F. Theodore Steinway - October 20, 1875) titled "Improvement in Agraffes For Piano-Fortes" relevantly interesting in this matter.  It's actually a patent for individual capodastro.   These were like large brass machine thread screws which were installed from beneath into what Steinway referred to simply as a transverse bar.  The wide slot in the head of this screw then received a  round steel "face", which was hammered into place,  He claimed this modification "reduced the width of the bearing surfaces of the capodastros ... and at the same time the strings are prevented from wearing into the faces of the capodastros."   It  seems that he was referring to the capodastro as the member that would normally be contacting the strings, like the V bar.  Does anyone know whether any pianos were actually produced with this feature? <dd>David Skolnik </dl></blockquote></body> </html>