[pianotech] Steinway A Bass String Rescaling

[JUDE REVELY]

I've always taken the numbers to relate to tuning as a function of 
stiffness. The fact that they are not literal representations of our ideal 
tuning curves is only an indication that our understanding of the problem 
has a long way yet to evolve. The formulae may be incomplete or perhaps just 
a foggy picture; but even Einstein's Theory of Relatively has holes (at 
least according to many current string theorists, not having crunched the 
numbers myself ;).

The other remaining question is, can an acceptable range of inharmonicity 
ever be determined objectively?

Jude Reveley, RPT
Absolute Piano Restoration, LLC
Lowell, Massachusetts
(978) 323-4545


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "William Truitt" <surfdog at metrocast.net>
To: <pianotech at ptg.org>
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 6:13 PM
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Steinway A Bass String Rescaling


> Hi Jude:
>
> I have rescaled a number of pianos in the past, and I have always wondered
> what the inharmonicity numbers really mean.  I know they are supposed to
> fall in the hockey stick on the graph, but really I have nothing for them 
> to
> stand in comparison to.  Typically in the past, I have aimed to even out 
> the
> inharmonicity and the tensions (with attention paid to breaking 
> percentage)
> as much as possible without taking the scale in another direction (i. e.
> making the scale better at what it already is).  What is interesting about
> the present discussion is that we are moving the general parameters, as 
> well
> as working to achieve evenness through the scale.
>
> A couple of months ago there was an article in the Journal about bass
> scaling.  It's jist was that it is desirable to lower the bass
> inharmonicity, at least to the level that we would see in a concert grand.
> Interestingly, the author gave no clue as to how he went about rescaling 
> the
> bass strings to achieve the desired values.
>
> I understand that a piano that has little or no inharmonicity would be
> pretty milque toast.  Still, the question remains:  Given the physical
> limitations (as in the laws of physics) of a particular sized piano with a
> given string length for Note (fill blank), what is a desirable and
> appropriate range, how do we determine that, and what manipulations would 
> we
> engage in to achieve that?  Since my discussion was about the scaling of a
> 6' 1" Steinway A, we can use that if we need to narrow things a bit.
>
> Thanks for your comments.
>
> Will
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On 
> Behalf
> Of JUDE REVELY
> Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 8:09 AM
> To: pianotech at ptg.org
> Subject: Re: [pianotech] Steinway A Bass String Rescaling
>
> As I understand it, there are also things that can be done to the whip to
> allow for increased flexibility at the ends and the ability to use a 
> smaller
>
> diameter core. This was the nature of Dr. Sanderson's last string related
> patent. I believe the Sanderson's call their version an "inharmonicity
> lump," although as Ron states, the benefit is in the smaller core, and the
> inharmonicity is along for the ride. There is a point of diminishing 
> return,
>
> however. Too little inharmonicity in the bass and there will be no tone
> whatsoever. So it is still important to manage the low bass inharmonicity 
> so
>
> that it is within an appropiate range and even from note to note.
>
> Jude Reveley, RPT
> Absolute Piano Restoration, LLC
> Lowell, Massachusetts
> (978) 323-4545
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Ron Nossaman" <rnossaman at cox.net>
> To: <pianotech at ptg.org>
> Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 9:24 PM
> Subject: Re: [pianotech] Steinway A Bass String Rescaling
>
>
>> William Truitt wrote:
>>
>>> Those of you on the list who have engaged in bass string rescaling along
>>> these lines, I would most appreciate your comments and your observations
>>> on the aural  benefits derived from such machinations.
>>
>>
>> Getting the rebar cores replaced with something smaller and more 
>> flexible,
>
>> like that 0.053" you noted, is a big low bass improvement. Add double
>> wrapping, and you've improved the flexibility of the string enough that
>> there might actually be some fundamental in it instead of a lot of high
>> partial clank. Getting the break% up is then easy because of the smaller
>> diameter core. The inharmonicity decrease is an artifact of these
>> beneficial changes, and is just more or less going along for the ride.
>> Ron N
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>