Steinway B Scale Conversion

[Delwin D Fandrich]

| -----Original Message-----
| From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org 
| [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Bob Hull
| Sent: March 31, 2007 6:26 PM
| To: Pianotech List
| Subject: RE: Steinway B Scale Conversion
| 
| Del,
| 
| It looks like the grain angle on your board is really 
| different than the original.  If it is, how do you determine 
| what grain angle to use?
| 
| Why do you float the end of the soundboard (isn't this  for 
| more flexibility?) and then you turn around and add a veneer 
| to stiffen it and add impedance?  These seem antithetical.  
| What am I misunderstanding?
| 
| Bob Hull

The grain angle is chosen primarily for the upper tenor and treble performance.
Apparently some believe that a percussive attack, rapid drop-off and short
sustain is not a tone problem, it's just different, but I don't like it. So, I
do what I can to make the tenor/treble bright but not harsh, with a controlled
decay rate and as much sustain time as I can give it. I'd also like this tone
quality to last for a few decades. Aligning the grain angle this way stiffens
the area around the bridges through the upper tenor and treble sections. This
because of the proximity of the bridge to the bellyrail.

With the grain angle running this way the stiffness component of the soundboard
system is increased some around the bass bridge. I cut it free of the rim to
lower this back down but then it is too low and the tone quality would be some
percussive. The fundamental, especially, would drop off faster than I would
like. (Yes, yes, I know. The original didn't have any measurable energy at the
fundamental but it does now and I want to keep some of it.) So I stiffen it back
up some while keeping the mobility gained by floating the board.

Del