Counterbearing angle

[Richard Brekne]

Overs Pianos wrote:

> Del, Richard and list, >As mentioned in my earlier post, we
> have found that soft duplexes will not stand up to commercial
> service. >Below is an image of a capo bar from a 1986 Hamburg
> Steinway D. We first restrung this piano in 1993, when >the
> capo and duplex bars were reshaped (but not hardened). This
> piano is one of the high use pianos I referred >to in my post
> of earlier today.
>
>
> Am I correct in assuming this is the piano you mentioned that
> gets like 3-4 tunings a week or something like that ?. Also
> looks to me from the picture that you are using significantly
> more then 0.5mm surface area for the capo. Do you have any
> measurements for that.. Also, since I have never actually
> checked (measured) the hardness of the capos and V bars I have
> reshaped, I wonder if you (or somebody) could describe whats
> involved in doing so. Since apparantly my experience with
> relation to the hardness of the bar differs from some off you
> others, it might be usefull for me to find out what the actuall
> hardness numbers are for the future.  In conclusion, it looks
> as though the jury remains well and truly out on the subject of
> front duplexes. We are still experimenting with variations on a
> theme. Some answers may begin to appear in Reno? Seems to me
> like there is much aggreement on the issue of duplex length,
> string deflection parameters, and what kind of tone results
> from a thin vs fat profile. The only real difference I see so
> far is this buisness about hardness... and we may actually not
> be that far off with each other after all.
>
> This has been great reading so far... hope the discussion
> continues for at least a bit more.... :)
>   Regards, Ron O --

--
Richard Brekne
RPT, N.P.T.F.
Bergen, Norway
mailto:Richard.Brekne@grieg.uib.no