Killer Octave Question

[Greg Newell]

---------------------- multipart/mixed attachment
John,
         I am certainly not trying to paint you as being anything at all 
one way or the other. You have clarified your position in this post as one 
who endeavors to duplicate the original in every way possible with regard 
to design but perhaps not entirely in implementation. I understand that you 
may use different methods to achieve this duplication vis a vis power tools 
and the like but you look for the end result to be basically the same. In 
your last paragraph you mention some efforts to improve or modify tone and 
touch. It is these efforts that I am most earnestly interested in. I 
believe others are as well whether we all happen to agree or not.
         I glean from your most recent posts that you seem to be taking 
this rather personally. This is unfortunate as I had hopes of learning 
something in a free exchange of ideas. Your last sentence below seems to 
show you lashing out at others to protect your position. If I mis-read I 
apologize. If not, I am saddened. If you choose to continue in this thread 
or any others I have hopes that a free exchange of ideas can be done 
without any posturing or feelings hurt if ones ideas or ideals aren't 
necessarily shared by all. I respect your view and your experience and 
thank you for what you have been willing to share so far.

sincerely,
Greg Newell


At 01:54 PM 4/13/2003, you wrote:

>Greg,
>
>Are you trying to paint me as some sort of fanatic  or as someone that is 
>inconsistent with his own views? To remove any confusion about my approach 
>to piano rebuilding let me clarify. I find both knowledge, and inspiration 
>from how these pianos (S&S and M&H grands from 1880 to 1930) were built 
>and from their aesthetic principles of tone and touch. I am not a fanatic 
>that thinks that blindly following this course will answer all the questions.
>
>My approach is similar to what I see  with people who make replicas of 
>early pianos. Aesthetics are the guiding principles behind their 
>decisions. Most of these pianos are not exact replicas. They make changes 
>to the design and materials if they feel that it would make the piano more 
>durable or make it easier to service. They are not slaves to antique tool 
>and method but use a mixture of hand tools and modern power tools - 
>whichever works best. Some even make changes to the design in order to 
>save cost. But any of these changes are only made if they do not 
>compromise the aesthetic goal which is to bring these pianos back to life.
>
>I have made many changes to how I re-build Steinway and Mason & Hamlin 
>grand pianos over the years. Some of them in order to improve durability 
>or to make then easier to service and others to modify tone and touch. The 
>gaul of these changes is to bring these pianos back to life for the 
>pleasure and refection of music lovers. Whether I meet this goal or not I 
>know I do not want to end up with an instrument that sounds and looks like 
>it was reborn as some sort of Frankenstein's monster; an exuberant 
>experiment showing off it's creators latest ideas and to hell with any 
>semblance of what it once was.
>
>I will get to your other questions about rib crowning once the waters 
>become a little clearer.
>
>John Hartman RPT
>
>John Hartman Pianos
[link redacted at request of site owner - Jul 25, 2015]
>Rebuilding Steinway and Mason & Hamlin
>Grand Pianos Since 1979
>
>Piano Technicians Journal
>Journal Illustrator/Contributing Editor
>
>
>
>Greg Newell wrote:
>>John,
>>         I think I see your line of thought here. You have exclaimed that 
>> you rebuild with the same techniques you have found on the piano 
>> originally. Did I paraphrase that correctly? If so how can you tell if 
>> the original bridge was intended to be crowned from the factory or if it 
>> simply took on it's curvature from being mated to the soundboard panel 
>> for 'lo these many years? I gleaned from your web site that you 
>> pre-crown the ribs prior to gluing them to the new soundboard panel. 
>> Correct? Are you able to ascertain from the originals what the arc was 
>> intended to be or is that subject to some change throughout the years? 
>> Is there documentation to support any originally designed crown? Did S & 
>> S and Mason and Hamlin crown ribs originally and for some unexplainable 
>> reason abandon the practice? I'll stop here so as to not burden the list 
>> with too many questions at once. Thanks to all for your indulgence.
>>Greg

Greg Newell
mailto:gnewell@ameritech.net 

---------------------- multipart/mixed attachment--