Journal arrival times

[Jeannie Grassi]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
Hi Paul, and anyone else with the same experience,
The Home Office is keeping track of these late deliveries.  They have been
having trouble getting the Postal Service to deliver, as promised (no
surprise from me!)  Could you please drop Dan Hall an email and let him know
you are still getting yours late.  danhall@ptgstore.com

Thanks much,
jeannie

Jeannie Grassi, RPT
Associate Editor, Piano Techncians Journal
mailto:jgrassi@silverlink.net
  -----Original Message-----
  From: owner-pianotech@ptg.org [mailto:owner-pianotech@ptg.org]On Behalf Of
larudee@pacbell.net
  Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2002 7:21 AM
  To: pianotech@ptg.org
  Subject: Re: Tuning Pin Size


  Dave,
  I seem to get mine about two weeks after everyone else.

  Paul

  "David M. Porritt" wrote:

     Paul:
    I got my February issue several days ago.  You should have yours soon.
dave
    *********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

    On 1/25/02 at 11:37 PM larudee@pacbell.net wrote:

      Erwinspiano@AOL.COM wrote:
          The details are in the article, but the disadvantage is that the
1/0 pin will be
          less rigid.  This can be a problem in a Steinway type design where
the distance
          between the point of string tension and the pin block is roughly
three times
          greater than in an open face design, and where there is no plate
bushing to
          mitigate the leverage.
            Hi Paul -- I'll read the article but would you mind saying this
a different way as it's not clear to me. I find that using no 1 pins in new
blocks is not a problem unless fit too tight but what pin isn't. I don't
have any trouble with no. ones otherwise. I'll read the article, really!  I
can't deny that no 2 are stiffer but ones render nicely when fit well which
is why I like them.

              >>>>>>>>>>Dale Erwin
      Dale,
      Part of the problem, even when you read the article, is that it's in
two installments, and the February issue isn't out yet.  The answer to your
question will probably lead to more questions, all of which are addressed
fully in the article.  The simplest answer, however, is that in a Steinway
the string height above the pin block - not the plate - is roughly three
times greater than it is in an open face design like a Bechstein.  Since the
string tension is roughly the same, the leverage exerted by the string on
the pin is three times as great.  If the pin sizes are the same in both
cases, pin flex will produce roughly three times as much string movement in
the Steinway as in the Bechstein - i.e. it is less stable.  Going to a
larger, stiffer pin size will partly compensate for that.

      Chances are that at this point we get into "but what about...," in
which case I get to rewrite the whole article on line.  I would just as soon
wait for the February Journal.  There will probably still be plenty to
debate, but at least not the stuff I've already covered in the article.

      Best regards,

      Paul

_____________________________
David M. Porritt
dporritt@mail.smu.edu
Meadows School of the Arts
Southern Methodist University
Dallas, TX 75275
_____________________________


---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/5c/f4/a5/a2/attachment.htm

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