Understood. Dale -----Original Message----- From: David Love <davidlovepianos at comcast.net> To: pianotech at ptg.org Sent: Mon, Dec 21, 2009 7:12 am Subject: Re: [pianotech] String scaling was BB Mason and Tenor Cross over Just to clarify, the string doesn’t sound better because it’s a double wrap, it sounds better because the core wire is thinner and that may require a double wrap. If you use the same core wire dimension as the original (say .060) and just double wrap it, it won’t sound any better. David Love www.davidlovepianos.com From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of David Love Sent: Monday, December 21, 2009 7:07 AM To: pianotech at ptg.org Subject: Re: [pianotech] String scaling was BB Mason and Tenor Cross over The issue isn’t the double wrap per se that makes the string sound “better”. It’s the relationship between the core dimension and the outer dimension that dictates that you need to have two wraps rather than one. I don’t recall the exact ratio but the outer wrap can’t exceed a certain ratio to the core without having to go to double wraps. I presume the issue is keeping the wrap tight around a core that’s too thin when compared to the thickness of the copper. Since I tend to reduce the core dimensions in the monochords they tend to need double wraps. I haven’t found the reduced tension in the bichords to be a problem tonally. With very high tension down there I just think that the bass changes character too much when compared with the tenor section. Steinways, especially the small ones, tend to be too bass heavy in my view. A strong bass is nice but I don’t like it to be too overpowering and it needs to blend well. David Love www.davidlovepianos.com From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of erwinspiano at aol.com Sent: Monday, December 21, 2009 6:43 AM To: pianotech at ptg.org Subject: [pianotech] String scaling was BB Mason and Tenor Cross over Hi David Up till this moment I have primarily delegated string scaling to the Arledge folks. What I know is... what I like to hear. When I've received Steinway L/O Bass strings that have been thru the P scale or Alrledge programs what I find is that I do not like the sound of the reduced tension at the top in this area. It's weak and nasal. Perhaps I should give this scale a try on the O in the shop All monchords in my pianos are double wrapped even 9 fts. primarily because it is a more flexible string and has clearer sounding fundemental/partials with less trash noise. I had a 1920's L with very beautiful robust sounding original bass strings, except the single wrapped mono-chords.The original L scale from the 1920's had tensions up around 66 to 70 % breaking strength on notes 20 thru 26. On my L, when it was re strung, was the first time I encountered the weak sound issue. Yes, the tensions is high and string makers typically do not like to boost it to this level for fear of string breakage, but, I've not had any break. I had the same issue on a 1976 Yamaha C-3. BTW when I request this tension increase, I relieve the sting manufacturer of any liability. David did you request a double wrapped mono-chord in this set to get these curve? Charts and graphs are very useful tools but like tuning machines our ears are the final judge.... and, as is evidenced by this list we all have a different idea of what we wish to hear. I'll be intersted to pursue this with you. Dale That’s interesting that you find the need to boost the tension in notes 20 – 26. I find that I prefer to drop the tension slightly from note 20 – 26 on Steinway pianos when compared with the original. In fact, I find that the bichord section generally benefits from a reduction in tension as you can see illustrated below. Combined with using a thinner core wire dimension in the monochords (Ao is .051) makes for a nicer bass response with much clearer pitch recognition. That kind of change, btw, is fairly common these days with many stringmakers/scalers. This is a Steinway L that got a new board and a 5 note transition bridge. The top graph is the original scale, the bottom one is the modified scale. Tension is in red. You can see that notes 11 – 26 have been brought down somewhat and the low tenor smoothed out. The sound in the bass here has more than adequate power but it now feels like the bass is at least coming from the same piano as the rest of the scale. You can also see that the treble end has been boosted somewhat mostly changing the speaking lengths just slightly in the capo section mostly and trying to adhere a bit more to something somewhat more logarithmic. By looking at the purple line (speaking lengths) you can get a sense of the shape of the long bridge and tenor connector (bottom graph). David Love www.davidlovepianos.com From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of erwinspiano at aol.com Sent: Sunday, December 20, 2009 6:46 PM To: pianotech at ptg.org Subject: Re: [pianotech] BB Mason and Tenor Cross over Ron >Probably > primarily the end of the bridge affect. I think it needs mass there. More likely stiffness. Get high basses too heavy and they tend to clang. That seems true and is a change to be tried out on the next Stwy B But, If you get em too weak they tend towards nasal and thin. I've often requested that the string maker increase tension on notes 20 thru 26 on Stwy basses and others. Seems as scaling programs drop off the tension in this area more than I can tolerate aurally. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech.php/attachments/20091221/fa5cf184/attachment-0001.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC