This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment Ron, The panel was 3/8" thick. The bridge configeration. This is experimental as stated before. I = was thinking of patenting the thing but the costs.... If manufacturers = today were interested in R&D, maybe we would have an answer to EP's = grasp on the lower end of the market. As it is, anyone who tries to = improve the pianos performance, tone and etc is going to loose money = trying to do it themselves. But firstly the concepts. (in loose form) A bridge is there to transfer the strings vibrations to the soundboard = and to cause other strings to vibrate in sympathy. The soundboard is there to make the sound of the strings audable to the = ear. >From this point I designed and built a piano ? totally different to all = others. Without drawings it may be hard to understand but I will give = it a go. I laminated the soundboard on a curved bench and succeeded in retaining = about 50% of the benches crown. This soundboard was then edge shaped and fitted into the iron frame. = (special iron frame) The shape was full width at the top (an upright = piano) extending down on the bass side at about 30 degrees in , to the = bottom. In the treble, the board was straight down for about 18" then = angled down to the bottom about 18" from the bass side. This board was glued and screwed direct into the iron frame. The bridge was at the top of the piano. I place a board on top of the iron frame that was shaped to fit in the = top of the piano so that it would pivot ? at just higher than the = bearing point and with another board at the bottom of this upper board = that connected the upper board to the soundboard. A full length single bar-bridge was then placed on top of the upper = board at the correct bearing point. A pressure bar was fitted to the iron frame. When the string was fitted, it gave a slight down pressure onto the = soundboard. In my first attempt, I used a cast aluminium frame, non hardened and = this bowed in under the pressure of the strings causing the soundboard = to buckle. It still worked but I could not get the required tension on = the string. I then had an iron frame cast from the same mould (too = heavy) and had to use another board of inferior quality. It worked, but the results were as I described before. I live in Darwin Australia, a city of 75000 people. No foundry, no = timber yard, nothing. If it had worked better I may have been able to conduct further = experiments as the results showed great promise in producing a quality = sound at a much cheaper price than that of existing construction. I have the drawings (from provisional patent) photos and letters from = University lecturers. Further information can be provided privately to interested parties. Incidently, it is not easy to write about your partial successes or = failures but in the interest of trying to get upright pianos to a status = almost equal to grand pianos and more progress the pianos in general I = decided to write this for the list. I know that not all of you will agree but I hope that you find this good = thinking material. Regards Tony Caught caute@accessnt.com.au I have changed my server. > >>I built an experimental piano once using a spruce soundboard, = laminated to >hold a small crown and used no ribs. Admitidly the bridge was of a >different type and in a different position than standard, however,=20 >> >>The tone was slightly hollow, the volume was down, but the sustain was >incredible. Ihave seen many old (1800s) piano with seemingly no crown = but >still with a reasonably sound. >> > >Tony, > >How thick was the panel, and how did the bridge configuration and = position >differ from 'standard'?=20 > > Ron ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/af/45/25/b9/attachment.htm ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC