The Steinway Bell Patent

[Delwin D Fandrich]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

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

  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Erwinspiano@aol.com=20
  To: pianotech@ptg.org=20
  Sent: September 16, 2002 7:30 AM
  Subject: Re: The Steinway Bell Patent


  In a message dated 9/14/2002 1:12:42 AM Pacific Daylight Time, =
Richard.Brekne@grieg.uib.no writes:



                 List

            Well I was wondering if support is the issue why not add a =
short stiff beam and another nose bolt. It seams like the same idea =
would be accomplished with less fuss.
            Dale Erwin

           Typically, we leave the bell and add a beam.  ------Del
       =20

           Hi  Del
      Can you describe decernible tonal differences that you can =
attribute to the stiffness created by adding the extra beam or is just =
for good measure in hopes of supporting  the rib scale improvements etc? =
Also one does not wish to be thought of as nuts for removing such a =
stalwart stwy invention (the bell).
               Dale Erwin

Well, I think so. It does seem to help sustain enough to warrant the =
extra work. And we leave the bell and bolt in--we don't remove it. Their =
influence doesn't overlap--they do different things. Though the brace =
could, I suppose, be place to receive the bell bolt. I prefer keeping =
the added brace down a bit.

Del

Del





---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/08/ef/43/3d/attachment.htm

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