<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" = xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" = xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" = xmlns:st1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" = xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"> <head> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; = charset=us-ascii"> <meta name=ProgId content=Word.Document> <meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 10"> <meta name=Originator content="Microsoft Word 10"> <link rel=File-List href="cid:filelist.xml@01C4CA5C.427AE9D0"> <o:SmartTagType = namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="PersonName"/>  <style>  </style>  </head> <body bgcolor=white lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=blue = style='tab-interval:.5in'> <div class=Section1> I think that’s = backwards.  As boards get older they get = stiffness challenged.  More loudness = comes from being less stiff, lower impedance, more energy is absorbed by the = board rather than reflected back, so louder and less sustain.  That’s why the epoxy = method works as it does.  It adds = stiffness without adding much mass.  = Anyway, I sent the post on the spur of the moment without thinking it through. =  People, of course, do compensate = for the change in stiffness, meaning inability to support the string load, by easing up = on the bearing—as Ron N. pointed out.  It was just a thought.  = Epoxy and ease up on the bearing, rescale to correct and smooth out the scale = is probably the better way to go.  = <o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> <div> David Love <st1:PersonName>davidlovepianos@comcast.net</f= ont></st1:PersonName> = <o:p></o:p> </div> -----Original = Message----- From: = pianotech-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org] On Behalf Of Joe Garrett Sent: Sunday, November = 14, 2004 9:32 AM To: pianotech Subject: Re: Rescaling = for older soundboards <o:p> </o:p> <div> David Love said: = "Since an aging soundboard will presumably be less stiff with less available crown, does it make sense, when restringing over an old = board, to consider rescaling the piano with a lower tension scale. David Love <a href="mailto:davidlovepianos@comcast.net">davidlovepianos@comcast.net</a> <o:p></o:p> </div> <div> David,<o:p></o= :p> </div> <div> Hmmmm? Older soundboards = will be stiffer! The natural aging process of lumber exemplifies this. If you = live in an older home, try driving a nail into the olde studs!!! Yeah, like w/o drilling a hole, first, you'll be bending nails 24/7!!! However, you do = bring up an interesting point. My observation, on olde boards, is that = the upper treble is very "loud" and, with a decent bridge termination, = is very clear. Why? Because the board is stiffer. I think this is a very good = reason to NOT use hard hammers on an olde board! In years past, a lot of the OLDE = techs used to drop the entire scale, by 1/2 size! This approach, had some = validity, but, I persoanally think this is the wrong thing to do. Of course, this practice came about, way before the Electronic Age of easy accessability = to an easy way of doing the formulae. Thank god for the 'puter, in this case! = I used to do scales on a TI! Talk about tedious! One had to be really adamant = about scales to persue that! (Let alone, doing it with a Slide Rule. (you do = remember those lovely gadgets, don't you?<G>)<o:p></o:p> </div> <div> As for the scaling, in and = of itself, all we can do is to smooth out the inconsistancies of the = original factory screwups/design. And, hopefully, not overstress the original = intent of the structure design. At least, this is my approach to scaling. If we = are dealing with a new board, then it's a whole different approach, = IMO.<o:p></o:p> </div> <div> Best = Regards,<o:p></o:p> </div> <div> Joe Garrett, R.P.T. Captain, Tool Police Squares R I<o:p></o:p> </div> </div> </body> </html>