Bridgetop Extravaganza Revisited

[Erwinspiano@aol.com]

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
In a message dated 12/23/2002 2:15:13 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
sbellieu@mindspring.com writes:

> Subj: Re: Bridgetop Extravaganza Revisited 
>  Date: 12/23/2002 2:15:13 PM Pacific Standard Time
>  From: <A HREF="mailto:sbellieu@mindspring.com">sbellieu@mindspring.com</A>
>  Reply-to: <A HREF="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org">pianotech@ptg.org</A>
>  To: <A HREF="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org">pianotech@ptg.org</A>
>  Sent from the Internet 
> 
> 
> .Thanks Terry.  I told the client to sit down and
> he took it like a man.  Also Dale how far did you have to plane down your
> piano with the same problem?  Did you have to do anything special to reset
> the bearing in the treble or did it get a new block?  I'm going for the
> "Deepest String Cuts" title for 2002 and there are only a few days left.
> 
> Happy Holidays,  Steve Bellieu
           
                                      Hi Steve
    Frustratin ain't it?
      Yes it got a new bolck but I didn't need to change the elevation. 
      I planed Just to the bottom of the string grooves and no more. If you 
go beyond this your side bearing will change dramatically. Also you could 
lower the plate a bit through out or as needed. The trouble is with so many 
factors involved it almost impossible to give accurate expert advice over the 
internet. Beside I don't know any experts! Concerning my question as to HOW 
you were determing downbearing . I meant what method. I was trying to verfy 
your technique just in case an error was being made and giving you false 
reading.
        Regards An Blessed Cristmas
       Dale Erwin

> 
> Dale Erwin wrote:
> Could you share how it is you're measuring 1.5 degrees of bearing on the
> bass and with what. If the rear string length was 8 inches( possible on a 
> D)
> 8 Times .026=.208 or (1.5 degrees) of distance bearing . Considering this
> bass bridge has no cantilever  I don't mind seeing this at the top end of
> the bridge but I'd like to see .05 degrres in the mono
> section........................
> 
> Dale,  All measurements referred to so far were from the strung piano.
> Individual strings were removed and thread/gap measurements were taken.  I
> was conservative in the bass and subtracted for the twisted part of the
> string riding on the hump.  Note # 3 showed 1.3 deg, note # 10 showed 1.7
> deg, and note # 19 showed 1.3 deg.  Inverse tangent of (gap/rear length).
> Did you mean to write .5 deg in stead of .05 ?   Just for giggles I checked
> one of the previously measured tenor bridge strings in the middle of the
> overstrung section after the bass strings were off.  (The following day)  
> It
> came up from .06 deg to .5 deg.
> 
> 
> Greg Newell wrote:
> I re-read your original post below and I still come to the same conclusion.
> It sounds as though you're somewhat accomplished in rebuilding so I'm not
> sure I understand your hesitation in recapping. If the original pins are
> loose and you don't intend to replace with oversize but you are going
> through the trouble of pulling the plate and then subsequent re-stringing
> then .... why not? ..............................
> 
> If I could do something with epoxy in a few hours and save all that 
> expense.
> It will get new pins.  I am not an accomplished rebuilder or expert
> woodworker.  I have done dozens of restringings and several board shimming
> internal restorations with doweled in new blocks.  I haven't done any in
> shop belly work for almost a year.  Am doing mostly actions now.  At one
> time I was hot to try bridge capping but I don't think this is the right
> time for me.  The piano will go to another shop if that is the decision.  
> It
> has been a lot of dues paid to get to where I am right now.  It has kind of
> been a relief that the constant acquisition of tools has slowed and I have
> been busy doing things I am good at.  I'm reluctant to take on the big
> learning curve again.  It is tempting though.  I am handy with chisels and
> planes and japanese saws and reach for them first before power tools.  I
> used to cut down key # 88 with a bandsaw, now I pare it with a chisel just
> for the pleasure of it.
> 
> Ron Nossaman wrote:
> But it's not being condemned, it's being restrung even though it sounded ok
> before? Is the damaged cap the reason for the restringing? And if so, why
> the reluctance to replace it? If not, why is it being restrung?
> 
> The piano is long overdue for restringing.  It has never been restrung.  It
> is starting to shed treble strings.  Capo needs to be reshaped.  No one
> noticed the cap.  It does not sound good in the treble.  I thought I was
> catching a whiff of that old " If it doesn't have X amount of crown it 
> isn't
> worth working on".  That was why I said I was not going to condemn the
> piano.  I was trying to find out if any one had done the kind of bridge top
> resurfacing that I am imagining.   I have an obligation to try to repair
> economically before replacement.
> 
> >I'm anticipating tight new bridge pins are going to contribute to tonal
> >improvement up higher.
> 
> Why, considering the condition of the cap and resulting bearing
> measurements?
> 
> The pins come out easily.  I thought the bearing was ok in that part of the
> piano.  (I'm not an expert,  I'm soliciting an opinion from you rebuilder
> types)
> 
> 
> Everybody,
>    One thing I have learned already is to inspect every piano in the field
> if possible.  I hate these kind of surprises.  Forgive my lack of protocol
> knowledge on this kind of message board if I'm creating strange posts.  I
> guess we have to be careful not to take each other out of context with all
> this cutting and pasting.
>     I attempted to quantify the condition of the grooves now that the
> strings are off.  Either it doesn't look as bad as I thought or I'm getting
> used to it.  Maybe they are swelling up a bit.  Humidity is up.  I held a
> straight edge on the edge of the bridge and slid a needle under until it
> stopped.  It measured between .025" and .030" in tenor and low capo.  High
> capo was .020" to .025".  Actually that is about as bad as I imagined,  the
> strings were about 2/3 into the top.  I have no idea what "normal" wear is
> because I have never thought about this before.  Mitigating factor :  the
> wood at the edge that the ruler was on is a little bit puffy.
>    Is this too far to sand/plane down?   Could the duplexes be ground down
> a bit if so?   This might be my last gasp here.  Does anyone know of anyone
> who has attempted to resurface a top?  I guess this is mostly for my own
> interest since I would only do it if it were a known procedure that worked.
> Like epoxying pins is now a known procedure.  I seem to remember it used to
> be controversial.
>    I just had another thought that might not offend those who thought any
> buildup of epoxy in the groove would fail.  What about swelling the top a
> little,  then planing,  then renotching,  then pins in w/ epoxy and
> saturating notches and top.  Any amount the grooves swelled up would then 
> be
> saturated and not built up.  (Wood Epoxy Saturation Technique anyone?)
> 
> Cheers,  Steve Bellieu
> 


---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/d2/41/49/98/attachment.htm

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--