Hi Paul, and Terry. That was basically my reaction. That said I know Terry pretty well and I think I understand where he was comming from. A question in my mind is raised from these posts tho... Assuming one has acceptable/desirable downbearing with the bridge as it is, and only want to dress up the notch and bridge pin holes,.... why bother planing down the string grooves ? If one is worried about the string groove being too low behind the bridge pin... then one must have also registered negative bearing at that spot. If that be the case then sanding down most certainly can change the bearing situation. On the other hand... if there is no negative bearing at or around the notch itself... then the string leaves the notch and the pin at the same spot or the string leaves the wood before the pin. So why bother with the bridge surface itself ? Strikes me (and always has) that the natural (non excessively induced by over active hormonal type string seaters) string grooves are a pluss for a couple reasons. One, they tend to equalize the downwards force on the bridge (front to back) and two the already compressed wood acts as an inhibitant to further compression. I wonder also if they tend to stop on their own after a bit ...there is a point where downwards force from the pins and upwards resistance by the wood of the bridge being held up by crown tends to be equal in the sense that natural grooving can no longer occur due to lack of enough conflicting forces. That happens well before 0 bearing. Cheers RicB Cheers RicB > Geeezzzzzz, here's another one! Our points (even though I should speak only for myself), I think, Terry, were that the bridge repair by itself as a solution to an unclearly stated problem may, without other data, create unintended consequences. Recommending a procedure devoid of context is perilous, particularly the context of a piano.:-) PRJ
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC