Clarification on Bl"uthner's brochure (and Junghanns' book)

[Ron Nossaman]

>I think this is meant to emphasize that the rib crowning produces
>something like a very shallow barrel vault between the cutoff
>bar and some corresponding length of the bentside rim, with the
>straight line along long bridge being near the top of the vault
>--as opposed to producing something more spherical.  This is what
>I meant by referring to crown along the bridge in the Bl"uthner;

Ah yes, I understand.


>I didn't mean it in opposition to crown along the ribs (as in, "measuring" 
>crown along the ribs with a cord).

In opposition to - as in (roughly) perpendicular to - as in along the long 
bridge? Ok, I got it, but there will still be crown formed parallel to the 
long bridge as a result.


>I should have added
>that the ribs in the diagram were distinctly fanned out (closer
>together on the bent side)!

As we are seeing more and more.


>2.) In a post of 3/14/03, I said that "Junghanns et al.
>(Piano- und Fl"ugelbau, Frankfurt am Main: Verlag Das Musikinstrument, 
>various editions in the 1970's) point out that
>it has sometimes been thought -- e.g., by a Feurich designer -- that the 
>longitudinal pull, or longitudinal vibration, of the struck or vibrating 
>string on the bridge termination is able to
>influence tone by causing the bridge momentarily or periodically to "tilt" 
>(kippen). For this reason, Feurich was said at one point" [to have 
>experimented with making their bridges straighter, to
>take better advantage of this claimed tonal difference,especially
>in attack tone].
>
>I misremembered; I should have said F"orster, not Feurich.

But the transverse excursion of the string already rocks the bridge forward 
and back (at least to where it was), with or without the longitudinal. It's 
measurable.

Ron N