No downbearing ?

Erwinspiano@aol.com Erwinspiano@aol.com
Thu, 1 Jan 2004 15:48:38 EST


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


>& Many of them sound very nice.

And many of them don't sound anywhere near nice. Nice compared to what, a 
fifty year old Poole spinet? In my opinion, it's more a double standard of 
not holding them to similar standards of sound production as grands that 
makes these old uprights sound good. As in : very nice... considering... 
and better than I expected.

  >Ron--As with many double standards the difference is econmics which is the 
case  between Grands & uprights. A grand is always about 3 times as 
expenseive which means the upright got about 3 times less of something.


>In my mind the upright soundboard is more of a mass driven system. I.e. 
>long strings and big soundboards. These boards are tapered, thicker at the 
>top in the treble & gradually thin down to about 1/4" near the bass/ 
>bottom end for flexibility.

If it's a mass driven system, why the attention to flexibility differences 
between the bass and treble? Where's the mass component that's any 
different from grands?
>> What I mean by this statement was a take off to what Jean- Jacques 
original post was about ,in that the soundboard doesn't require bearing & crown to 
have the strings energy transferred to it, just coupling. The mass component I 
refer to is  the stiffness & mass of the soundboard panel & ribs but minus the 
crown & bearing squash for additional stiffness.

>     I recently put bridge caps on one of the first Baldwin Uprights 
> (1880) ever built. (Gorgeous looking & sounding) The board was flat as a 
> pancake. I shimmed hairline cracks and then applied scraped off the old 
> varnish and epoxy finish treatment to the front of the board. This is an 
> amazing sounding piano. I really think that the hardness of the epoxy 
> finish is also a contributing tonal factor.
>    Food for the new year.
>    Dale Erwin
>>>>> Notice I didn't say very nice,considering or better, I said amazing. 
The flat board was set up with some bearing but not that much. The tonal 
improvements come primarily from (some) bearing and tight bridge pins in maple & new 
strings of course.
Not very filling. Again, stiffening the board with epoxy "contributed to 
the tonal factor", but it's still somehow a mass driven system that was 
designed to be without crown or bearing. I'd like a little gravy with these 
grits please.

Ron N
>>OK I'll go that one with you but If the epoxy added any additional 
stiffness to the board then would it not improve tonal output? However I won't bet on 
the ponies with this one. Mainly this piano sounds good because of superior 
American Cra(P)ftsmanship.grin
   Regards--Dale
   Got a good storm going out here today & its coming your way

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/4f/f3/29/48/attachment.htm

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

This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC