Now here is an interesting thought

[Farrell]

Hi Ric, - You likely are aware that I don't much subscribe to the 
traditional "circle of sound" thing - at least not how it is presented in 
marketing brochures. But, regarding the front termination directly bonded to 
a very solid pinblock, I think the more that a piano's belly components are 
all structurally bonded together in one solid piece, then all the better - 
if nothing else, it may make for a more solid/stiff structure.

Yes, please post (or send to me) lots of pictures of the front terminations, 
the pinblock area, the brace connections at the pinblock and this I-beam you 
speak of. How flat is your pinblock? Is there some sort of pinblock flange 
that the struts connect to? Sometimes pinblocks in old designs rotate a bit 
in the middle under string tension without lots of plate material in that 
area to help it keep it's original flat shape. I will be working with Phil 
Bondi in the near future on the belly of his 1860s S&S grand. The pinblock 
on his has warped/rotated. It will be replaced, but we are interested in 
ideas to strengthen this area so that it doesn't rotate in the future. 
Anything you can share with your Bluthner design would be appreciated.

Terry Farrell

----- Original Message ----- 
> Thanks for the interesting reply.  The open pinblock / unbushed pins thing 
> moves in the direction of our famous circle of sound which so many have 
> endless enjoyment ridiculing.  Ok... so the marketing part of this claim 
> can get a bit thick I think most of us will agree.  But like you I remain 
> open, and very much so, to the possibility that there more be to the whole 
> idea then one initially  may  conclude. Noteworthy is also the example of 
> the CF III.  Yamaha also discounted the pin bushings thing for years.... 
> but according to one of their main testing heads... a Mr Ono.... research 
> their also led them to employing the bushingless idea because of its 
> benificial affect on the overall sound picture.
>
> I am not convinced one way or the other either when it comes down to it... 
> but my opinion at this point sways in favour... if for no other reason 
> then their are too many such examples for me to ignore, and I find the 
> marketing reasoning to be ....well.... too weak.  JMPOVOTS.
>
> But this Bluthner now.... this is just a bit different.  I'll have to post 
> a picture of it later on.  These bridges are morticed right into the 
> pinblock.  And the pinblocks leading edge is open as this instrument has 
> no plate in the modern sense.. only iron brace bars that screw into metal 
> plates for the hitchpins and the pinblock. There is a large metal  I-beam 
> like brace/connector that screws from this open face to the belly rail 
> binding the whole thing into one unit.
>
> Interesting point you make about the soft termination at the front..... I 
> will remember this comment as I get the thing put back together.  The Bass 
> front bridge has 22 notes with  10 single string unisons. The tenor front 
> bridge has 21 trichords.  From there up the front termination is taken 
> care of by screw down capo-like bars.  Perhaps the thinking was that this 
> was a good thing for the longer strings ?  A way of achieving some kind of 
> balance ?
>
> Anyways...  I thought it was interesting.
>
> Cheers, and thanks again for the post.
>
> RicB