---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment David wrote I think there are those who when put to a rebuilding request by a customer need to try and recreate a "Steinway sound" but might wish to employ what has been represented as a more reliable method than CC. But if the RC&S method produces its own unique characteristics and is, as you say, something which certainly didn't sound like a Steinway, then it would be good to know whether those differences are inherent in the differences between the two methods or simply a matter of customizing a particular design. Hi Dave >> I've been following this thread in my post convention fatigue. I'd like to speak to this. I build rib crowned boards with some panel compression support as well. These typically have slightly taller ribs & less wide than the original. I also have some compression in the panel. I typically dry to no less than 5.5% emc & no more than 6%. I like this range for the results I'm getting & regional climate conditions. It's not excessive by any means . I believe for my ears I like the sounds of designs that retain some compression. I Use sitka spruce panels, which Steinway does & some diaphramizing which they also do. The panels are similar in thickness but on the thinner side. I press in a dished caul as they do. I use the same scales with minor alterations. & Yes I like the tri-chord sound in Ds. I use primarily white Spruce ribs on the bottom and sometimes some Sitka in the top treble(s) ie. Bs & Ds. Which they Don't. I no longer use sugar pine except in some instances or in smaller pianos. Which they still do in ALL models. I can hear the difference between a board ribbed with sugar pine & one with spruce. I market what I call a "variable radius soundboard" crown which means the ribs are cut with increasingly steeper radius going into the treble & many folks on this list & off do this. Most of this is not news & many use this. My point is that all our bellied pianos sound to me like some of the best Steinways I've heard even though they are built in this non traditional way. I have fewer Killer octave problems & better balance of registers or as good as the very best C.C. design at least . This point is the same as what others are saying ,The methods are most reliable & predictable. My point is,finally. To me These pianos aren't some derivation of the Steinway sound but the best qualities of the Steinway sound. Great sustain,even thru the breaks & treble areas, rich tone color, & power which isn't driven to distortion & FFF levels. I have no problem or difficulty selling my clients on these modern features. When they hear it they get it. NO client has ever said no I don't want you to do that & none ever said it didn't sound like a Steinway. Ask any one who heard My D (at the PTG Cal State) last weekend if they heard a Steinway Sound. Or the Concert artist who performed Gershwin ,who stopped before the finale of Rhapsody in blue To State what an Amazing piano this was & because of it he was performing his uncut version. It was a great experience for me personally & I was gratified to have many enthusiastic words of support from some other rebuilders, Technicians & friends. I thank them all with mutual respect & support Dale Erwin I think Sarah pointed out what might be some considerations in those differences. I can't address those issues with any real knowledge as I am not an engineer and lack adequate experience. But I can hear differences between different types of pianos and I am interested in exploring the topic further even if it is only in a speculative manner. David Love davidlovepianos@comcast.net Erwins Pianos Restorations 4721 Parker Rd. Modesto, Ca 95357 209-577-8397 Rebuilt Steinway , Mason &Hamlin Sales www.Erwinspiano.com ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/3c/e1/ea/c2/attachment.htm ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC