restringing question

[Richard Brekne]

Delwin D Fandrich wrote:

> > Don't try reinventing the wheel and some of those old guys
> > KNEW what they were doing.  Don't second guess old
> > craftsmen.
> >
> > Newton
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> With respect, that wasn't my point at all.  I second-guess the old craftsmen
> all the time -- there is much that can be improved with most of these old
> scales.

Grin... Del I would suspect that you do a lot less guessing then you do educated
experimentation. Big difference between a fellow like yourself dinking around
with different solutions to old problems, then most of the rest of us.

> It's just that in this case there is far too little information available.
> It sounded to me like an arbitrary change was being contemplated without
> sound technical reasoning supporting the change.  In general, mono-chords do
> not extend up far enough with the transition to bi-chords being made
> prematurely.  In this case, they are used to what is probably quite a
> reasonable point -- at least it seems so without knowing more about the
> scale -- and nothing would be gained by making this change.  Quite likely,
> the results would not be as good as the original.

Interesting point... We have a piano sort here in Bergen that used to be made
here. Jacob Knudsens they were called. From about 1960 to 1973 they made this
little 110 cm model that had monochord bass strings for the first 20 or so
strings. I can get the exact number...perhaps even the scale if you like. It
worked quite well really. Plenty of volume, nice transition to the tenor and
unwound strings... very popular pianos.

> Which is not to say that the original scaling itself is reasonable, just
> that the number of mono-chords seems reasonable for a scale of this type and
> probable size.
>
> Del

--
Richard Brekne
RPT, N.P.T.F.
Bergen, Norway