brash failure

[Ron Nossaman]

> Greetings, 
>       I must be missing something here.  We seem to be comparing maple to 
> spruce??  And comparing wood that is used for completely different functions.

I'm comparing wood to wood, where one is known and expected to 
deteriorate, while the other is "believed" to be immortal. 
When did spruce get an "exemption from deterioration" card?


> Spruce used in acoustical transmission doesn't lose anything by its age-induced 
> brittleness, witness the outstanding tonal qualities of 300 year old violin 
> tops, (Edgar Meyer, one of my customers, has an 18th century bass that is 
> regarded as one of the best in the world, and it has played alongside more than one 
> Strad!).

A piano is still not a violin, and a piano soundboard is still 
not carved to it's crowned shape. Thus, this comparison is 
still not a valid one now matter how many times it's presented.


>     The elasticity of a hammer shank could easily deteriorate to a point 
> where a new one would be better, but a very light, dry, brittle soundboard can be 
> more responsive than a new, heavier one.  

Yes, it could, and yes it can. People have also won the 
lottery, I hear, so that's entirely possible too. Truthfully, 
do you replace shanks because you believe they might be 
brittle, or because the knuckles and bushings are worn out, 
and it's getting new hammers anyway? And you've never seen a 
shot 80 year old bridge cap, or did maple get an exemption 
too, but only in certain special bridge caps?


>And even that doesn't completely 
> address the comparison between the premium wood of say, 1920, with what is being 
> put in pianos today, i.e., How is it that my 1920 Steinway M has virtually no 
> false-beating strings, no cracks behind the bridge pins, etc.  and this 2001 D 
> has at least 7 un-tunable unisons due to poor pin termination.

You got me there. Based on that extensive cross section, it 
surely has to be the superior wood of 80 years ago. There 
could be no other possibility. So why aren't you recovering 
knuckles and re-bushing those old shanks instead of replacing 
them? How about bushing, leathering, and felting the old 
wippens while you're at it? You're apparently throwing out 
superior wood and replacing it with inferior. How those new 
inferior maple shanks will work better than those better 
quality originals, which could have deteriorated to the point 
where new would be better, even though the bridge cap didn't, 
is something I doubt I'll ever connect without hurting myself. 
This doesn't involve the Summer Solstice and chicken blood, 
does it?


>     I believe that a very fine soundboard could be made with old spruce 
> reattached to new ribs. 

Almost certainly, depending on your construction method. But 
why would you if that nice dry brittle soundboard still 
produces such fine response?

This isn't about isolated instances or anomalies, it's about 
general continuity and trying to make practical sense.
Ron N