Laminated Soundboard Panels

[Overs Pianos]

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
At 2:02 PM +0000 4/2/04, Michael Gamble wrote:
>
>Hello List and Terry F
>Regarding these laminated panels - in fact laminated soundboards of 
>any instrument - there is no doubt that they are not as good as the 
>usual solid panel.

That's a bit of a sweeping statement Michael, and one with which I 
would definitely disagree.

>  To laminate incorporates a bonding between the laminations and this 
>must surely have an effect on the resulting sound production.

Very unlikely. The glue will raise slightly the density of the 
resultant panel, but this alone is unlikely to effect the tone.

>I know for sure that a 'cello with a laminated belly has nothing 
>like the sound quality of the normal carved belly.

This may be so, but no pianos have a carved belly. Both laminated and 
solid sound board panels must always be made up of several pieces 
joined together.

>  I can only assume that the poor old sound waves aren't quite sure 
>in which direction they are to go as they travel with the grain.

You can't assume anything.

>They probably cancel each other out and that means poor quality output.

I doubt it. I suspect you've passed judgement on the laminated panel 
based on the numerous trashy pianos out there with a laminated panel 
coupled with poor tone. Before you condemn all pianos with laminated 
boards, have a listen to the piano on our sound samples web page. It 
has a laminated panel.

http://overspianos.com.au/samp.html

>I must say I do go for the analogy between the piano soundboard and 
>the 'cello or Contra Bass so far as efficiency of sound production 
>goes.

If you were to compare pianos to cellos, I doubt if it will allow you 
to draw any worthwhile conclusion about sound board design 
philosophy. Each is designed from a completely different objective.

>  Laminations have only one thing going for them IMHO and that is strength.

I disagree. Solid panels are stronger along the grain and weaker 
across the grain, while laminated panels tend to be more average in 
strength in both directions. Strength is not the 'strong point' of 
laminated panels. I believe the primary benefit of laminated panels 
(those which are made from quartered spruce all through) is their 
dimensional stability and their ability to resist degrade in varying 
ambient conditions.  I doubt very much if there is any noticeable 
tonal difference between a quality laminated or a quality solid sound 
board. I use laminated panels because they result in pianos with 
outstanding tuning stability and the boards are resistant to 
compression ridging.

>We're not really looking for strength, per se, in the construction 
>of soundboards, but for maximum sound output of the highest quality 
>coupled with the strength to produce it.

To desire to achieve the highest sound output alone with a given 
design is, I believe, a seriously flawed quest. The primary object in 
designing a piano must be to arrive at a balance between power and 
sustain. This is why I believe it is pointless to make analogies 
between pianos and bowed instruments. The objectives are quite 
different. When playing a bowed instrument, with the exception of 
pizzicato, the string is excited for the entire time. In the piano 
the hammer strikes the string and that's it. From then on the tone 
goes through a gradual period of decay until it disappears. Just 
imagine what sort of a disastrous piano we would have if it was 
designed for the highest power alone. A powerful tone which which 
decayed quickly would be pretty uninteresting.

>  That's what Stradivarius achieved with his instruments and that 
>must be the goal of anyone attempting that fickle art.

I find the aura that surrounds Stradivarius today to be rather 
tiring. Often we hear of front ranking string players who are using a 
Strad', and how wonderful it is. What most people fail to acknowledge 
is that none of them are playing Strads which are faithful to their 
original design. All of the concert use Strads have been modified to 
conform more to what musicians require in power from a modern bowed 
instrument. An original Strad would be considered 'gutless' by 
today's standards. Today's modified Strads have been highly modified 
to produce the output levels expected of a contemporary instrument. 
This charade has got to the silly situation where serious 
contemporary luthier's instruments are overlooked because they don't 
have the right pedigree.

So we have this absolutely ridiculous situation which has evolved, 
where Strads and other earlier stringed instruments are being 
modified in various ways to satisfy modern performance requirements - 
and it appears to be acceptable, while on the other hand we have the 
'holier than thou' community who throw their hands in the air in 
horror when somebody dares to modify pianos manufactured by one of 
the high class manufacturers.

At 9:41 PM -0800 3/2/04, Donald Mannino wrote:
>
>- The laminated panels used in most pianos

But not all

>  that have them are cheaper to make because of the low price of the 
>wood used.  Very low grade core wood has usually been covered with 
>slightly nicer looking veneer.

But not all.

>   Making up a soundboard of spruce, even low grade spruce, is more 
>work and wastes much more of the raw wood.

Absolutely.

>- I agree with you that there is no reason that laminated panels 
>can't produce sound as well as traditional panels.

What about 'produce sound as good, but with more consistency from 
piano to piano, and with a very much longer service life' ?

>   The few efforts at making high quality laminated soundboards have 
>shown this, but they have always been a marketing flop.

The only piano maker that I know of who has used an all spruce 
laminated panel has been Samick. Almost all of the remainder, to my 
knowledge, have used trash-wood for the internal laminates. We have 
used all-spruce laminated panels for our first four pianos. I'm 
currently using a solid panel for our fifth instrument, which will be 
otherwise identical to no. 4 (all our boards have been 100% rib 
crowned). I expect to be using laminated panels for all future 
instruments. Samick have started using solid panels in their pianos 
(probably in response to ignorance on the part of both consumers and 
technicians). Their solid paneled instruments appear to be having 
more sound board problems, judging from the instruments I've examined 
to date.

Regarding Don's claim that the few efforts at building instruments 
with quality laminated panels have been a marketing flop, from where 
I'm sitting at present its a little early to tell. At present I'm 
finishing my fifth piano and all are sold including no. 5. Next month 
we'll start building another two 225s since at this time, I've got no 
stock available for sale.

>   The piano market is awfully conservative about changing materials.

True, but that should not be a sufficient reason alone not to use an 
alternative method if it proves to be superior. If the argument you 
put against laminated panels was to be adopted by Kawai, they would 
never have introduced their ABS actions. I believe that the use ABS 
for action parts is an excellent idea, which is superior to using 
wood, and that eventually this will be fully accepted by the market. 
Let's not condemn a technology out of hand without giving it proper 
scrutiny. If the market is biased against a good idea, I believe we 
have a responsibility as professionals in our industry to educate the 
sometimes idiotic-market we serve.

Ron O.
-- 
OVERS PIANOS - SYDNEY
    Grand Piano Manufacturers
_______________________

Web http://overspianos.com.au
mailto:info@overspianos.com.au
_______________________
---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/98/c3/37/01/attachment.htm

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