Hi Stéphane
I wish I DID know the answers to my questions. But sadly... I am quite
in the dark. I know the usual answers to this quandry go in the
direction of the SB being in some sense or another too stiff relative to
the scale/bearing... etc. But in this case I have at least good enough
reason to wonder in the opposite direction to querry you all. The 12 mm
thingy was just a number thrown out for the sake of discussion... and no
necessarily any taper...
I'm wondering if a nasal sound... with little or no apparent low end
response can have to do with LACKof stiffness in the fat part of the
soundboard... i.e. in that section that is somewhat front of the long
bridge and bass bridge.... low tenor area. I know this seems to go
contrary to the usual conclusions we'd jump at.... but it connects with
aging soundboards and why they start sounding thin and nasal...
Cheers
RicB
Hi Ric.
Methinks you know the answers to your question, and simply try to raise
comments. Interesting topic, as always. Not that my contribution here
could be interesting, but here are the usual things that I believe
up till
now would favor deeper bass, given here for same purpose (raise
comments) :
- taper the soundboard thickness from 12 (! Wow) mm in treble to 5 mm in
bass corner.
- put the bass bridge further away from the rim.
- allow longer back scale.
- reduce number and/or thickness of ribs in the bass side.
- float the soundboard by one or another mean.
- reduce down bearing on the bass bridge.
- use heavier hammers in the bass section
- change the strike point (I found this can do huge changes to both
sound
and dynamics, also in the bass section, at the cost maybe of projection)
- reduce strings tension, at the cost of some volume (not sure about
this,
but comments welcome)
- put the piano on concrete floor instead of wood
- ... anything else?
Best regards.
Stéphane Collin.
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC