Killer Octave

[Delwin D Fandrich]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ron Overs" <sec@overspianos.com.au>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: September 09, 2001 6:07 AM
Subject: Re: Killer Octave


>
> >  > The problem with leaf springs is that they have hysteresis loss when
> >>  compared to coil springs. This is why road trucks can be built
> >>  without shock absorbers when leaf springs are employed. The
> >>  hysteresis loss of leaf springs would contribute further to loss of
> >>  sustain.
> >
> >Isn't this true only when multiple leaf springs are stacked?
>
> Certainly multiple leaf springs will have much higher losses than a
> single leaf, but the single leaf will still have losses if the end
> rubs against another surface.

Surely it should be possible to arrange a simple wood leaf spring in this
application that doesn't rub against anything. As I said, though, I've only
considered this; I've not actually done it. And at that most of my
consideration was aimed at a somewhat different area of the soundboard.




And, now, a rant aimed at no one in particular and all of us in general:

I have to say that I am pleased that the subject has come up again after all
these years and that it's being given serious consideration by some.

These days I'm somewhat ambivalent about the whole idea of spring-assisted
soundboards--my so-called creative energies are going into different areas
just now--though I do lean toward believing it might help some pianos in
some situations. With that thought I encourage anyone who is interested in
developing any of these ideas to go ahead with them. If I can help with what
experience I've had with them and with some new ideas I'll be happy to do
so.

I'm not such a purest that I'm going to insist that my client must live with
a problem that only a new soundboard can cure if I can improve things a bit
for a fraction of the cost. Not everyone can afford a $20,000 plus
remanufacturing job. Especially after just spending $20k plus for a piano
that shouldn't have the problem in the first place. Even with today's
inflated economy that is still a lot of money for most folks. Being in the
highly lucrative piano service business we wouldn't understand that, but
it's true nonetheless. And, as we keep learning, even buying a new $20k
piano doesn't always insure a problem-free musical experience. As we keep
telling ourselves, anything under $20K is nothing more than a PSO and
doesn't deserve to be called a real piano.

I don't think any of us, as part of a struggling industry, can afford to be
so elitist as to insist that everyone bust be willing to spend upwards of
$20K to have their piano 'properly' remanufactured complete with all the
latest design improvements or spend upwards of $20k for a minimally adequate
new piano or else be prepared to put up with garbage performance.

I go on thinking it will be in our long-term best interest to develop a
viable middle ground. I go on thinking we should be looking for ways to give
our clients the most bang for the buck. And that acknowledges they won't
always be spending all the bucks we think they should be spending. Whether
they are even able to or not is another issue.

I don't really know just how effective any of these ideas will prove to be
in the long run. Nor do I know which specific ideas have promise or which
ones will be complete duds. And I'm not going to spend a whole lot of my own
time working on any of them, but I do hope that others will. If a few new
ideas and some encouragement will lead to some productive
experimentation--great! I'll be happy to attend the class being taught by
the new soundboard spring guru in a couple of years.

Hopefully this time around the idea won't be plagued with quite as much
derision before it gets itself worked out in practice so at least we'll know
what it is we're deriding.

Regards,

Del