Special tuning pins

[larudee@pacbell.net]

Joe,

Point taken.  I read your post, although I'm not in a position to comment on
your bushing method since I have not experienced it.  I have no reason to doubt
that it is a major improvement over standard bushing methods.

At this point, my pins are not even intended as an alternative to a system like
yours, although that is one potential application.  Right now, its purpose is
merely to be able to repin and yet have pins which are functionally standard
size even though they fit snugly in oversize holes.  Reduction of flagpoling is
an application for another day, although I must say that in terms of design I
prefer something which operates on precisely the same axis as the hole rather
than depending upon the mating of the plate to the block.  There is a potential
for different degrees of compression on the bushings if the mating is not the
same at every hole and perfectly stable over time.

Paul

Joseph Garrett wrote:

> Paul,
> I posted my method of prepping bushings. I have found that this method
> almost completely eliminates the "crushing" you refer to. I have pianos, out
> there, that were done that way, and as yet, (20years +), have not exhibited
> a problem. Therefore, I personally don't see the need for expensive,
> although well thought out, modified tuning pins.
> Regards,
> Joe Garrett
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <larudee@pacbell.net>
> To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
> Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 11:07 PM
> Subject: Re: Special tuning pins
>
> > Joe,
> >
> > Part of the reason for the pin is to offer another option than replacing
> > the pin
> > block in order to avoid using oversize pins.  With regard to its
> > application to
> > new pianos, I have to say that I am not a fan of tuning pin bushings.
> > Bushings
> > may mitigate the flagpoling of standard pins, but unreliably so.  The
> > degree to
> > which the bushing helps depends on how much it has been crushed, how
> > well it
> > meets the pin hole, how many tunings have progressively crushed it,
> > etc., and
> > can vary from pin to pin.  Personally, I doubt that they accomplish very
> > much,
> > especially after they have been crushed over time.  I would rather
> > create more
> > stiffness in the pin and do without the bushings.  The result will be
> > more
> > uniform and longer lasting.
> >
> > I would like to see nothing larger than 1/0 diameter at the coils and
> > enough
> > thickness the rest of the way to ensure optimum tuning characteristics.
> > This
> > can vary according to piano design.  In Steinways perhaps 2.5/0 (7.20mm.
> > or
> > .284") might give the right degree of rigidity.  In open face pin blocks
> > the
> > only reason to use my pin design might be to have more surface contact
> > area in
> > the block.  The enlarged section of the pin does not project far enough
> > above
> > the block to affect flagpoling.  In closed blocks, on the other hand, it
> > can
> > make a considerable difference.
> >
> > Paul Larudee
> >
> > Joseph Garrett wrote:
> >
> > > Paul,
> > > Now that you have described the tuning pins. I get it. Although, I'm in
> > > agreement with the rationale, I'm not sure I fully see the reason for
> such a
> > > pin. Is it possibly for the situation specifically in S&S grands? If so,
> > > then I see the reason, as well. Thanks for the explanation.
> > > Regards,
> > > Joe Garrett, R.P.T.