<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16640" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=MailContainerBody
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 10px; PADDING-LEFT: 10px; PADDING-TOP: 15px"
bgColor=#ffffff leftMargin=0 topMargin=0 CanvasTabStop="true"
name="Compose message area">
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Greg,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Thanks for saving me the time to write in on this subject.
I could not have said it any better.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Al Guecia</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt Tahoma">
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<DIV style="font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A title=grahampianos@yahoo.com
href="mailto:grahampianos@yahoo.com">Greg Graham</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, June 03, 2008 10:38 PM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=pianotech@ptg.org
href="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org">pianotech</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Pinblock contamination: myth?</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>The recent thread on how to deal with a few low torque<BR>tuning
pins in a new block stirred up the "pinblock<BR>contamination" concern.
<BR><BR>I was talking to another tech who maintains a few (not<BR>one, not two,
but several) Steinway D's with loose<BR>pins in the low bass. Touch the
tuning hammer and off<BR>they go type loose. One or two of the pinblocks
are<BR>rebuilds, maybe 10 years old. I wondered why he<BR>didn't try a
light application of CA to solve the<BR>problem. He said, "I'm waiting for
the right time to<BR>use larger pins. I don't want to contaminate
the<BR>blocks." <BR><BR>How does CA "contaminate" a pin block? I
think of it<BR>as adding some density to the wood. It is inert.
It<BR>does not attract water and rust pins like the old pin<BR>tighteners did
(and still do!). <BR><BR>It seems like removing a big bass string from a
tuning<BR>pin, cranking out the old pin, and pounding in a new<BR>one is much
more invasive and risky (to the string),<BR>and certainly more expensive, than
just a couple drops<BR>of CA. You certainly could pound in a larger pin
if<BR>the CA didn't work, right? <BR><BR>Use of larger pins assumes the
hole was somehow larger<BR>than it should have been, either because of
localized<BR>lower density of the block, or perhaps a hot, dull, or<BR>clogged
bit toasted or enlarged the hole. We assume<BR>the larger pin is a
permanent fix, and thus the<BR>"right" repair. But if the defect is a void
or crack,<BR>wouldn't a larger pin make the problem worse where CA<BR>would help
fill voids and prevent crack propagation? <BR>If the problem is low wood
density, wouldn't CA<BR>increase the density?<BR><BR>What, exactly, are the
risks? How does CA damage,<BR>contaminate, or in any other way render a
pinblock<BR>(new or old) less functional, now or in the future?
<BR><BR>Does it reduce resiliency? Will the wood not be able<BR>to handle
the seasonal movement, causing long term<BR>looseness, even if a larger pin is
installed later? <BR><BR>Are we concerned about jumpy pins? My
experience is<BR>limited, but I have not seen CA cause jumpy pins. <BR>Have I
missed out on the fun?<BR><BR>Does the CA turn the tuning pin into a bumpy
reamer<BR>which destroys the hole over time? (I've heard
that<BR>suggested, but never pulled a pin to see for myself. <BR>I doubt
it.)<BR><BR>Are we concerned that there will be visible evidence<BR>of the CA on
the plate or bushings that would cause<BR>someone to doubt the quality of the
piano, thus<BR>lowering sale price?<BR><BR>I'm not talking about old blocks, and
I'm not talking<BR>about heavy amounts of CA. I'm asking about
new<BR>blocks with a few problem pins. What is the risk of a<BR>light
application of CA to the low torque pins? <BR><BR>And how could this
possibly "ruin" a piano?<BR><BR>Greg Graham<BR>Brodheadsville,
PA<BR><BR><BR></BODY></HTML>