This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment Oh David! Have no fear! My eyes bugged out when I read the original = post. I was muttering all sorts of expletives to myself as I read much = of it. But I didn't say too much for two reasons: 1) the original post = indicated that Steinway reps were going to inspect the piano in the near = future - so I figured let's let them take a look and see what they say; = and 2) I wouldn't expect much better from them or any other manufacturer = anyway - especially on a work of art whose construction and design and = function is shrouded is so much mysticism. I had a similar experience when I bought a new 1098 back in the mid = 1990s. That piano had a full 1/4-inch of reverse soundboard crown, the = pinblock was separated from the backposts (you could slip a business = card down into the crack), and on several notes in the middle of the = keyboard a little green man down inside the piano would come out every = time you played one of those notes and would ring an annoying little = bell. Both the dealer and Steinway techs said there was no problem with the = reverse crown - I called NY several times asking to speak to a technical = representative and two of the three I talked to did not know if Steinway = pianos were supposed to have positive crown (concave on the = rear/bottom). They did recognize the pinblock/backpost problem, but = their solution was to simply route out a small groove on the pinblock = top and glue in a strip of wood to cover up the crack (no clamps, no = through-bolts, and most importantly - no new piano). The head of = Steinway's concert techs (Patton I think, I forget his first name) from = NY listened to the little bell man and after quite a bit of poking and = prodding decided it was likely the v-bar casting and nothing could be = done about it - however, the local dealer tech had the nerve to suggest = that we would "get used to it". So no, this letter wasn't news to me, however it is indeed an = interesting situation. So if you're looking for comments at this time, I'll bite - here goes! Lines with the ">>" are from David R's original post on this topic. >>Concerning the bridge/downbearing, let's keep an eye >>on this if the buzzes have been eliminated for the >>time being.=20 Okay, here is our opening prayer that the problem will just go away by = itself - or at least the piano owner will not notice it in the future. >>While it presents a situation to >>keep an eye on, I do not want to make an immediate >>pronouncement that there is something wrong there.=20 Believe me, nor will they EVER "....make an immediate pronouncement that = there is something wrong there." That's what voicing needles are for! >>The >>primary thing that manufacturers look for is >>the total composite bearing on the front and back >>combined. This should, of course, be a positive >>bearing.=20 "Should" be positive bearing? Does this mean negative total bearing can = be okay? >>Theoretically, there should be positive front >>and back bearing. However, pianos seldom conform to >>the theoretically correct. This was the ultimate. These words clearly suggest that seldom does a = new piano have positive front AND back bearing. WOW! That's a mouthful. = Think about that for a minute.=20 Let me tell you: Every piano that I have put a new soundboard in has = both front and rear positive bearing on every string! Not only that, the = bearing on every string falls within a relatively narrow target range.=20 I guess if you throw a bunch of spruce flitches, some glue, and some = piano wire into a pot and stir it up, that would likely yield an = assembly that "...seldom conform(s) to the theoretically correct." This = is lunacy. >>I have taken many bearing >>measurements - on both good sounding and >>not-so-good sounding pianos. Some of the best sounding >>pianos have exhibited the measurements you describe >>below while some of the lesser sounding pianos >>are textbook perfect. The downward forces of the >>strings over the bridges (anywhere from 800 - 1100 lbs >>of force) cause each piano to develop its own >>unique shape. What that really means is that some pianos appear to survive the = manufacturing process and seem okay when they go out the factory door. = But some pianos have collapsed soundboards before they even leave the = factory. They really put a half-ton of downbearing on a new Steinway? = That's a whole lot! I guess this "unique (soundboard) shape" is likely a key to each piano = having it's own personality. >>Sometimes that "settling" can be >>measured to exhibit what we technicians commonly cause >>bridge roll. That in itself is not a great cause >>for concern but rather a sign that we need to monitor >>this in case tonal issues arise consistently with a >>piano. What the &*%# is this crap? Just like we need to monitor a pinblock/back = separation on a new piano? Maybe we just need to monitor it and if the = plate doesn't crack and the piano fold up like a suitcase before the = warranty period ends, we have no problem? Maybe here is the real = application for CA and bridge pins - if the strings keep creeping up the = bridge pins because of negative front bearing, tap the strings down and = glue them in place with CA! Personally, such "settling" would indeed be = a "great cause of concern" if that were my piano. >>In my experience, seating and leveling the strings, >>hammer filing, voicing meticulously, hammer spacing, >>and making sure the bridge pins are seated in >>the bridges alleviate any tonal problems 98% of the >>time. You MAY have one of the "2% pianos" there but >>let's wait and see if problems develop again >>before we determine a course of action. No. IMHO, this is a mis-statement. What really is meant is that you may = be one of the 2% of piano owners that won't give up and won't believe = all the crap excuses and hand waving and story telling that the = manufacturer spews out in an effort to wear you down. BUT. As I stated earlier. Let's not jump to any conclusions. Let's wait = to hear what transpires during the upcoming inspection...... ;-) Terry Farrell ----- Original Message -----=20 From: "David Skolnik" <davidskolnik@optonline.net> > I just had occasion to read this thread. I need to leave for an early = > tuning (Steinway D, in fact), so I can't afford the tortured sessions = it=20 > usually takes me to excrete even a few sentences. Perhaps I'll try = later=20 > this evening. I am, however, dismayed that, among other things, the=20 > manufacturers response seems to elicit only mild consternation on the = part=20 > of list responders. I too have gotten similar response, though not=20 > written, over the years. Why is there not outrage on this list over = this=20 > situation? Are we still so afraid of the manufactures long reach and=20 > memory? I am. But what would the technical community's response be if = they=20 > presented such claims at a class at a convention, or in their = promotional=20 > material? What is a warrantee worth? David R has made this=20 > public. Assuming his assessment and observations are correct, what = does it=20 > mean for any of us (or our clients) if we cannot see this situation=20 > successfully resolved? >=20 > David Skolnik ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/8f/3a/63/fa/attachment.htm ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC