Low FAC, Henry F.

[Joe & Penny Goss]

Larry,
Your post aroused my curiosity. So for the first time in a coons age I did
a FAC tuning on my SAT11. Of course the numbers that I used were false ones
but give an idea. Using the #3.4 F,  
3.7 A,   3.4 C The stretch numbers for the following result, C1-4.2, 
C2-0.6,  C3-1.0,  C41.3, C41.4,  C5  1.5  C6 1.6,  F6  3.1,  C8  18.8 
The closest match that I have is a Kimball KG5 6' 8" Grand. Yes your
numbers match a real live piano. Just KIDDING.
Joe Goss
PS do not stretch further just to get a brighter sound. IMHO

----------
> From: Ken Jankura <kenrpt@mail.cvn.net>
> To: pianotech@ptg.org
> Subject: Low FAC, Henry F.
> Date: Sunday, September 06, 1998 11:02 AM
> 
> 
>      I recently tuned a 9-foot Henry F. Miller in a local church. No one
> I've spoken to has ever seen one. How 'bout you New England techs? Are
> these beasts any more common up there? The piano had no front or rear
> duplex, so despite a rather poor treble strike point from another tech's
> rebuild, it has even less than one would expect up there. The FAC numbers
> were all between 3 and 4, which I also have never seen before. What are
the
> theoretical ramifications of such low numbers?
>      I didn't have time to really explore that first visit but I've been
> asked to improve the sound if possible. I'll set the strike point, level
> strings, etc. What can I expect? Should I stretch the treble tuning to
try
> to brighten it up a bit? Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
> Thanks in advance.
>      Ken Jankura
>      Newburg, PA
>