<div>Thanks all for the encouraging words. Ric is asking on my behalf, really, for two things:</div> <div>1. How you -- you with experience of the art of rescaling -- how much variation you allow in tension, or what parameters you use in assigning tension to a scale -- I understand that it is a balancing act between tension, inharmonicity and Z - and am trying to implement ways to display the variables and allow what-ifs. </div> <div>2. Examples of actual numbers, especially where you have improved a scale. This means string lengths, original gauges, and how you modified them, perhaps with an explanation of why. Then I can try to get Excel to emulate the expert thinking. </div> <div> </div> <div>Getting Excel to interpolate string lengths etc. logarithmically etc is not a problem, nor is looking up string diameters. Adding Visual Basic into the mix adds significant power, so we may be able to have quite a tool sometime soon. But, lacking the rescaling experience, I need expert examples and guidelines. <br><br>Thanks again</div> <div>Jason</div> <div> </div> <div> </div> <div><span class="gmail_quote">On 12/17/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">RicB</b> <<a href="mailto:ricb@pianostemmer.no">ricb@pianostemmer.no</a>> wrote:</span> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">Hi Frank.<br><br>I understand this to mean you figure your string lengths first, then<br>figure string diameters to result in as even a tension (unisons or <br>single string?) as you can reasonably get.  How much do you look at Z<br>and inharmonicity... and basically how do you go about this.  Keep in<br>mind we are looking for ways of providing some kind of automation for<br> things usually done manually. A comment or two on how much leeway you<br>give for each of these parameters would also be very helpfull.<br><br>I get the feeling that excell may be too limited a tool for some of the<br>automation we've been tossing around.  But thats what we are going to <br>use so whatever is practical / doable will be attempted.<br><br>Cheers<br>RicB<br><br>   .........<br>   Starting with a blank piece of paper, designing a new piano, I prefer to<br>   calculate the string lengths with a pure logarithmic progression, <br>   and deal<br>   with the dogleg of the bridge in other ways.  By making the distance<br>   from<br>   the front bridge pins to the back bridge pins longer on one side of the<br>   break, and shorter on the other, the dogleg in the bridge can be <br>   reduced.<br>   The side bearing angle can be maintained, even thought the distance,<br>   front<br>   to back, is varied.  The bridge can be undercut, to further reduce the<br>   dogleg of the bridge, at least with respect to the gluing surface <br>   between<br>   the bridge and the soundboard.<br><br>   When it comes to restringing a piano, when the treble bridge is not<br>   being<br>   replaced, recapped, or repinned, I would not hesitate to reverse the<br>   wire <br>   gage progression across the break, when that would serve to smooth the<br>   tension across the scale, in some cases, more than a half-size.<br><br>   Frank Emerson<br><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br> -- <br>=cell 425 830 1561=