This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
Re: Scaling Problem reduexGood point, Joe.
I guess I'll put that hypothesis to bed with some of my other =
imponderables.
Thanks
Carl
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Joseph Garrett=20
To: pianotech@ptg.org=20
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 10:48 PM
Subject: Re: Scaling Problem reduex
Carl,
My hypothesis would be that when you twist the string in the opposite =
direction of the winding, you essentially make the winding loose around =
the core wire. Also when this happens, I suspect that the loosening does =
not occur evenly throughout the speaking length of the string. This =
loosening allows the core wire to oscillate, (vibrate), at different =
rates throughout the length of the string, therefore giving you weird =
harmonic readings from the SAT
Just my hypothesis. Hope the real brain types will chime in on this =
one. [grin]
Regards,
Joe Garrett
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Carl Meyer=20
To: pianotech@ptg.org=20
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 6:11 PM
Subject: Re: Scaling Problem reduex
Joe:
Thanks for your response. Only one so far.
I'm sorry your Brombach "loner" is such an unfriendly antisocial =
piano. I'm sure you meant "loaner" grin.
I don't doubt you are correct about twisting causing the problem. I =
just would like to understand what is happening. If twisting strings in =
the wrong direction causes the higher partials to go flat, couldn't we =
take a string that is excessively sharp and dial in a twist to correct =
it. Of course that is silly, but it shows my dilemma in trying to =
explain what is going on.
I'm still at a loss to explain why a string would go radically flat =
at the higher partials on only one note and less so on other notes. I =
used an Accutuner which may not have given the info that rct would have =
regarding amplitude etc.
I think that I used two turn twists for the single wound strings. =
In retrospect I realized that since this was a very short string piano =
that may have been excessive. It hadn't occurred to me at the time that =
twists should be related to the length of the string.=20
I recently sold a 7 foot grand that had bass strings by a particular =
maker, and some of the double wound strings were somewhat dead. Having =
nothing to lose, I put three full turns on the bad ones and they came =
alive. These were new strings. I probably won't use that maker again. =
I notice that there is wide opinions about twisting bass strings.
One more thought! If wire stiffness causes higher partials to be =
sharp, did my twisting in the wrong direction make the wire more limber? =
And did it stay more limber after twisting in the correct direction?
So many questions! So few answers!
Regards
Carl Meyer
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Joseph Garrett=20
To: pianotech@ptg.org=20
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2001 10:43 PM
Subject: Re: Scaling Problem reduex
Carl,
A few years ago, my son worked with me in my shop, he couldn't get =
the principle of twisting in the direction of the winding. Needless to =
say, he twisted the bass strings of my "loner" grand, (a 5'1" Brombach), =
in the wrong direction. About 90% of those strings, even after I =
retwisted them the correct direction, were bad. Really a nasty sound. I =
have since replaced them, but what you experienced, I'm convinced, was =
due to twisting in the reverse direction.
Regards,=20
Joe Garrett
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Carl Meyer=20
To: pianotech@ptg.org=20
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2001 7:40 PM
Subject: Re: Scaling Problem reduex
Ain't gonna lurk no mo, no mo!
I'm gonna tell a story. It's a bit sad and embarrassing for me =
but it ends okay.
A young man and his sister found an art deco piano on the =
internet a year or so ago for 10000 dollars. It had a severely cracked =
plate in the middle section. A half moon crack thru the tuning pin area =
and the two struts at the ends cracked about half way thru. This piano =
was a Strohmenger made in London about 1930. It was 4'1". Piano was a =
half round
shape (As Victor Borge would say "That big fat opera singer =
didn't lean on the side of the piano.") It was 2-tone, dark mahogany and =
light maple, and the rear of the lid opened like a duck's rear end. The =
legs swooped down to the floor to meet at the lyre. The mover said =
"I'll never forget where you live-It's where I saw this butt ugly =
piano". Actually, it grew on me.
The piano was in Austin,Tex and I was shown a Xerox of the =
crack. I told them that if anyone in the area could fix it I could and =
I doubted anyone else would even try. I won't give you a price tho till =
I see it. Well, they went ahead and bought it for 8000 and I did take =
on the job.
After repairing the plate (no I didn't weld it, I re-enforced it =
patched it and used 1/4 thick, 2 inch wide steel bar to support the =
sagging section and used lots of screws and steel filled epoxy.)
Now the embarrassing part. I rescaled the piano and was =
stringing fat, dumb and happy from the top down in the bass and was 2/3 =
finished when I realized I was twisting the strings in the wrong =
direction. Whoops! So I corrected them and continued. You'll see why I =
have to admit this later.
The reason this applies to scaling is that this piano had 35 =
notes below the bass break. There were no agraffes at all. Notes 36 =
and 37 were bichord wound strings and the next four notes were bichord =
plain wire.
I had a real problem when I chipped it. Lots of chipping but=20
the center section finally settled down.
Now when I tried to actually tune it, note 35 sounded terrible. =
It just couldn't be tuned. I tried tuning the fundamental of both =
strings to the accutuner and the two strings didn't even sound the same. =
Then I found that the left strings partials 2-5 were 21, 3, 4, and18 =
cents flat. The right were 21, 18, 21 and 38 cents flat. I sure didn't =
know what to do. I called everybody I could think of. Nobody could =
give me a good explanation. So I ordered a pair of the smallest =
universal strings I could get, put them on and lo and behold, It sounded =
good. So I ordered four more strings and used them on notes 36 and 37 ( =
the first notes above the bass break) They weren't nearly as bad as =
note 35 but=20
I replaced the anyway. =20
Now after all this work, I thought that piano sounder better =
that a lot of much larger poorly scaled grands. Certainly the best =
sounding 4'1" I've seen.
The customer is delighted and so am I.
Here are some questions.
Did my twisting the strings in the wrong direction damage them =
and what exactly did it do to them? And why just the top three?
If they were just bad strings, what was wrong with them?
I'm suspicious that the string winder didn't use enough tension, =
but would that cause the partials to go flat?
I checked the strings diameter and length etc and couldn't find =
anything wrong, no loose windings, nothing. =20
What happened? Anybody?
Thanks
Carl Meyer=20
---- Original Message -----=20
From: Overs Pianos=20
To: pianotech@ptg.org=20
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2001 6:11 AM
Subject: Re: Scaling Problem reduex
Kevin, Joe, Ron and other lurkers,
Saw your post earlier today Kevin when you wrote:
I've noticed something on some newer pianos lately . . . =
I've been encountering more and more pianos of late that seem to have a =
real scaling problem in the low tenor section. . . but where I really =
see it is in the new Yamaha model GA1, and . . GH1. What is happening is =
that the designers of these pianos have put too many notes in the tenor =
that belong in the bass. As you play chromatically down the scale, these =
notes start sounding like "pong-pong-pong" and then you hit the bass, =
and they sound normal again.
Your absolutely correct. Why oh why are so many manufacturers =
so 'thick' that they can't see that they're crippling their smaller =
pianos by insisting on breaking at B27. Little pianos like the GA1 =
should break at E32/F33 at the lowest, but they just don't get it.
I know that this is caused by continuing to drop the =
tension on the strings in order to get the fundamental down to the =
required frequency, but you reach a certain point, and you get a tone =
that seems hollow and is very difficult to fit in with the rest of the =
tuning.
As soon as the long bridge turns and heads for the bass side =
of the case the scale has had it. If the break was higher up the tension =
wouldn't fall away so dramatically.
I've had some partial success with carefully doping the =
hammers, and voicing the bass down, plus leveling strings, straightening =
termination points etc., but not to any totally satisfactory result.
No it's not possible to get it satisfactory. But why should =
technicians in the field have to go to such measures just to get the =
things to sound somewhat like a piano. And it's only half a fix anyhow, =
because the problem is with the scale.
Ron N's suggestion was sound, and I have no doubt that =
installing bichord covers for a few notes will make the piano 'less bad' =
as he says. But I'm more in favour of installing a tenor bridge and =
completely rescaling the thing. But you wouldn't bother with a little =
entry level piano like the GA1.
Kevin continued later in the day;
Thanks to all who have responded. . . . . . . . I have =
nothing but the greatest respect for Yamaha, and their products, (I own =
two) but I can't understand why that company, which is the most advanced =
in the world, could produce a product with such obvious poor planning.
While Yamaha certainly know how to manufacture pianos to a =
blueprint, they get the blueprint wrong. They don't seem to have a clue =
about scale design with their smaller grands (ie, anything under and =
before the C7F), and there's not a Japanese manufacturer with a decent =
upright scale. Furthermore, both the Yamaha CF and Kawai's EX are =
basically scaling clones of the Steinway D (all three have got a =
speaking length at F21 of 183 cm - what a magic number this must be!). =
Why? Why do this? What's so wrong with doing a bit of original thinking. =
We've all basically wasted a whole century by trying to follow in the =
foot steps of one company. Why do this? We homo sapiens are supposed to =
be intelligent, but sometimes we seem to be no more creative than sheep.
The Japanese are such industrious and intelligent people, =
that you would think that surely they would stop and go back to the =
drawing-board before shipping one.
There are intelligent folks and idiots amongst all =
nationalities. We just need to believe in ourselves now and then. We can =
move forward if we let ourselves do it. It's no use going back to the =
'drawing board' only to produce the same old trash. We need to rethink =
the parameters, and it needs to happen in our generation. Actually, I =
believe this list just might make it possible. Isn't that an exciting =
prospect.
If I tuned nothing but Yamaha grands, I could spend out =
my days in relative happiness.
I couldn't. They're fine while ever the wether stays stable. =
But as soon as the wether changes the tuning stability is 'out the =
window', and its scale and down bearing and sound board related.
But I just don't get it with these really small ones that =
are starting to come out on the market.
Many designers seem to be such 'traditionaloids', they can't =
bring themselves to move the break away from A#26/B27. That's where it's =
always been historically - so we can't mess with tradition can we? It's =
a similar situation with 7' grands which break at E20/F21. Just because =
the concert piano breaks at F21, why should the 7' scale be ruined by =
breaking it at F21. A 145 cm F21 speaking length on the 7' is going to =
be somewhat short on break % compared to the 183 cm F21 on the concert =
piano (and there's a 'paddock full' of these ordinary 7' pianos out =
there, which could be so much better at no extra cost). Let's damn =
tradition, if there's a better way of designing than the traditional =
way.
But I'm not working to please myself. I just don't want =
a customer to buy one, and then think that it's a tuning issue, like I =
should be able to just fix it in three to five minutes. I'm a =
"technician" not a "magician".
Exactly, but you'd need to be a magician to get many of those =
stupid little designs to hold tune for longer than takes for you to get =
your kit back in the car - if indeed you were able to get it into tune =
at all. I had an experience some years ago when I got a call-back to a =
newish Japanese 131 cm top of the range vertical I'd tuned the week =
before. "It's gone out of tune", she bleated over the phone. When I =
checked the piano, it was the fallen-over tension area just before the =
cross which had gone quite sharp (it had rained during the week since =
the tuning hadn't it!). When I tried to explain that the problem was =
with the scale design of the piano, the client didn't believe me. She =
accused me of incompetence and of trying to pass the blame onto the =
piano - which couldn't be the problem, after all, it was a new piano! I =
was less than impressed with the prospect of wearing the blame for =
something which I knew to be due to poor scale design.
There, I feel a whole lot better now. I've been quietly =
bubbling over for a while on this issue. Thanks Kevin.
We must widen our design perspective. It is now possible to =
design and build pianos which are better than anything which has gone =
before. Let's do it! Even the cheaper pianos could still have better =
design.
Over and out.
Ron O
--=20
______________________________
Website: http://www.overspianos.com.au
Email: mailto:ron@overspianos.com.au
______________________________
---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/0d/9d/95/f1/attachment.htm
---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC