JD wrote: "Of course the free assembly will crown up as the board takes on moisture {after being dried down pre-ribbing}. ...that's how the soundboard is given its crown by the English method..." > "Well I've read so many messages on this list about rib-crowned and > supported boards as though it was something new, when I can see nothing > different between this and the traditional English method that was > practised from about 130 years ago." RC&S design sounboards do not rely on the panel re-hydrating after ribbing to produce crown. The crown is set by rib shape. So there appears large fundamental differences between the RC&S boards and the traditional English method as you have described it. And who ever said RC&S concepts were new? Uncommon these days, yes. New, no. 15-foot radius crown is not exaggerated, but rather commonly found in RC&S soundboards. A panel in a soundboard with that kind of crown certainly would have some significant degree of compression in it if it were to be flattened - but why on earth would anyone want to flatten it? I don't get my soundboards anywhere near flat after stringing. Terry Farrell ----- Original Message ----- > At 09:45 -0500 23/1/08, Erwinspiano at aol.com wrote: > >>... I suspect that pianos are made differently for the European palate or >>your expectations of tone & power are entirely different. Viva la >>difference >> Many of us on this list as you know have been working with newer >> designs to prolong tonal capabilities, soundboard longevity & create new >> tonal envelopes without the destruction of wood cells produced by over >> drying panels before the ribs are glued on. (C.C. Methods) Apparently you >> all have figured that out how to defeat that years ago so boards never >> need changing in Europe or your idea of what consitutes fine has a >> different definition than we have here. > > Dale, you've got the wrong end of the stick! As I wrote in my reply to > David Love, I am all for putting in a new soundboard if the value of the > piano warrants it and I wish there were a thriving tradition of proper > restoration in England. I am not too familiar with practices in > neighbouring European countries but they'd have a job to beat compete for > low quality with English standards today, which is a great shame. > > When the spring comes I shall be fitting new soundboards in two grand > pianos and you will hear the results. > >> SO by Yankee definition & by the lack of tone we see in a flat boards & >> the improvements we can create building new R.C. boards & R.C. & >> supported boards, there is an entire world of tone that is waiting to be >> discovered by the World at large. > > Well I've read so many messages on this list about rib-crowned and > supported boards as though it was something new, when I can see nothing > different between this and the traditional English method that was > practised from about 130 years ago. I can remember well very early in my > career coming across American Steinway grands with the dead singing > octaves (what I call the flute section) and this and other really shoddy > characteristics of these pianos led me always to avoid them. I have > described the English method, which is outlined in Wolfenden's book and > would like someone to explain _precisely_ what you meean with all your CCs > and RCs and RCSs. If Terry Farrell, for example thinks a 15ft radius on > the unstrung crown is not exaggerated, I am to take it that his board will > be CC, for to be sure it will be compressed if he ever gets it anywhere > near flat. There's far too much jargon used here and far too many ideas > presented as the very latest thing when they're nothing of the kind. If I > with all my experience get confused with all the unnecessary acronyms and > fake jargon, goodness knows what the ordinary list subscriber must be > making of it. > > JD
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC