<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Re: Steingraeber factory pictures, bridge agraffes & adju</TITLE> <META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> <STYLE type=text/css></STYLE> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2873" name=GENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY> <DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#000080></FONT> </DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000080 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left> <HR tabIndex=-1> <FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> pianotech-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Overs Pianos<BR><B>Sent:</B> May 03, 2006 2:25 PM<BR><B>To:</B> Pianotech List<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: Steingraeber factory pictures, bridge agraffes & adjustablevertical hitchpins<BR></FONT><BR></DIV> <DIV></DIV> <DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#000080></FONT><BR></DIV> <DIV>[re the Dain agraffe]</DIV> <DIV>Was interested to read that the agraffe on the Stiengraeber grand was a Dain invention. It is a very good design, and superior to the Stuart agraffe, which results in string noise without the silicon blocks that he uses. Mr Dain has beaten me to the public domain with this one.</DIV> <DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#000080></FONT><BR></DIV> <DIV>Ron O.<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#000080><SPAN class=843205018-04052006> </SPAN></FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><PRE dir=ltr><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#000080><SPAN class=843205018-04052006></SPAN></FONT> </PRE><PRE dir=ltr><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#000080><SPAN class=843205018-04052006>It's been in the public domain for a long time, Ron. I worked with these devices <BR></SPAN></FONT><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#000080><SPAN class=843205018-04052006>during the late 1980s and they were in the public domain then. There are patents on <BR>these things dating back at least to the early 1900s. The earliest I have on record is<BR>from 1906 or something. I thought I was doing original work as well, but was quickly <BR>put straight. Sigh...there's just so little that is truly new under the sun.</SPAN></FONT></PRE><PRE dir=ltr><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#000080><SPAN class=843205018-04052006>For anyone interested I've written about these devices in the past -- Should be in <BR>the archives somewhere. Basically the theoretical explanation of how these things <BR>are supposed control the vibrating modes of the strings to be at all convincing.<BR>Like you, I did not find any evidence that they affected how the string vibrated <BR>-- but then, I wasn't really looking for any change in vibrational patterns. </SPAN></FONT></PRE><PRE dir=ltr><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#000080><SPAN class=843205018-04052006>Personally, I doubt the exact configuration makes much difference. As long as they <BR>don't introduce their own contributions to string noises, of course. I found that they <BR>did improve sustain but I'm pretty convinced that was the result of the additional<BR>mass they contributed to the system. There may be some slight improvement in <BR>coupling efficiency over the conventional bridge pin system but I doubt it's much.</SPAN></FONT></PRE><PRE dir=ltr><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#000080><SPAN class=843205018-04052006>The biggest advantage to them will probably come down the road as I doubt the <BR>termination will develop as many problems as do conventional hitch pins. That, and a <BR>general reduction in false beats which can probably also be attributed to the increase <BR>in mass.</PRE></SPAN></FONT><PRE dir=ltr><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#000080><SPAN class=843205018-04052006>Del</SPAN></FONT></PRE></BODY></HTML>