Yeah, I know how you feel. Seems like there are more of those days than the other kind. Greg At 07:56 PM 10/22/2002, you wrote: >One of the pianos on my schedule today was described over the phone when >the appointment was made as a rebuilt Steinway. Is I was driving out, >knowing no more about it than it's being "rebuilt", I went over the mental >checklist of what I expected to find - and not find. I wasn't >disappointed, which disappointed me... again. > >It's a 1905 A, two bridges. Refinished, gleaming plate, beautiful looking >shimmed soundboard, all visible hardware re-plated and dazzling. Asking >for any problems I should be aware of besides tuning, a sticking damper >was mentioned. Removing the music rack, key slip, cheek blocks and >fallboard, I got the distinct impression that the piano had been assembled >while the finish was still soft enough to stick things together. It went >back together a whole lot easier than it came apart. Setting the action >aside, I found a damper with a very tight guide bushing and a couple of >split shot clamped on the wire. The shot hadn't helped. Reaming out a half >dozen guide bushings and getting all the sluggish dampers working and >adjusted again, I went to my mental list and started checking things off. >Original back action, solid sustenuto tabs, new damper felts and >refinished heads, new Abel hammers, tapered but not tailed, and new shanks >and flanges. That's it for the action. The rest is original and noisy. > >Bearing measured quite reasonable throughout, considering the concave >soundboard - over 2mm past flat even along the longest rib, as well as the >usual killer octave. Bridge looks to have been capped, then badly drilled >and notched. Nicely finished, as is the board - at least on top. New >pinblock (I think), with the tuning pin holes countersunk on the bottom >side. Odd, but neat looking. Pins tight and riding the plate. > >Tone quality was just what you'd expect. Hard high distortion clang on >attack, not much evidence of lower partials, with the sustain sounding >like it was provided almost entirely by the duplex. Lots of high thin >partials, no meat. > >About the only thing this piano missed from matching my expectation list >was that it didn't have 4/0 pins in the old block. They bought it from a >dealer about a year ago, which was also on my mental list. Everything that >had little to nothing to do with performance, but everything to do with >appearance, was done quite well on this piano. Virtually everything that >should have been done to make it into a performing instrument instead of a >shiny piece of useless furniture was ignored. > >So now there sits a truly lousy sounding and playing piano of vastly >greater potential than was realized by the standard dealer rebuild I've >come to know and expect in this part of the world. Less than one third of >the work was done for what is typically three fourth's of the price of >doing it right, or better. The customer thought she had bought a rebuilt >piano. She didn't. The piano was raped, as was the customer, and it is now >almost a certainty that it will ever be done right, or better, because of >the money already spent. She'll probably call someone else next time who >will lie to her, since I didn't. I suppose it's just as well. > > From there, I went to a 64 note Pianola "player". A-1 to C-7 compass, 19 > note (all monochords) bass, the rest bichords, 6 of them wrapped. She > wanted me to look it over and make sure everything was OK, then tune it > if it needed it. A semitone pitch raise, tuning, and back destruction > (mine) later, it was less bad and as OK as it was likely to ever get. > They were thrilled. > >I'm not sure just what it is, but something just doesn't seem right... > >I don't intend to answer the phone tonight. Maybe not tomorrow either, so >don't call. >Ron N > >_______________________________________________ >pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives > Greg Newell mailto:gnewell@ameritech.net
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC