<HTML>In a message dated 11/25/2002 5:27:25 AM Pacific Standard Time, RNossaman@cox.net writes: <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Subj:Re: Belly rail crown - Why??? Date:11/25/2002 5:27:25 AM Pacific Standard Time From:<A HREF="mailto:RNossaman@cox.net">RNossaman@cox.net</A> Reply-to:<A HREF="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org">pianotech@ptg.org</A> To:<A HREF="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org">pianotech@ptg.org</A> Sent from the Internet . >         You know quite well there is some forcing of the bass and treble > corners to get them down but when the edges do contact the rim the two > surface areas are somewhere in the same relative plane and certainly more > so than purely flat surface. Besides we were discussing performance benifits I think we were discussing presumed performance benefits, and if any stress is undue stress and negatively affects performance, then what has been gained with all the rim height contouring when you still have to press the board down at the ends so much? I think it's much ado about effectively nothing.</BLOCKQUOTE>          I'm not defending their position just making the point that this was in their consiousnus. They obviously did have an idea about reducing bending strains but as to proving the performance benifits I think it was inconclusiv. <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"> Sure I do. They were making these subjective evaluations in exclusively >>compression crowned boards, in controlled conditions, over a very short >>period of time. That's a whole lot of limiting assumptions when you're >>looking for performance improvements in something that's supposed to last >>as long as pianos are expected to. Here's an onion, a pound of hamburger, a >>teaspoon of salt, and a can of chicken stock. Make bouillabaisse. > >               Huh? What huh? How can you start with a specific set of ingredients you used last time and get something fundamentally different this time? Do you really suppose they ever considered anything but compression crowned boards in their experiments, or considered what thinning the panel would do to those compression levels, and the long term affects? Judging from the number of these pianos on showroom floors with dysfunctional boards, I would say not.</BLOCKQUOTE>      Well I'll give it back to then. What do you think they were after in that experiment? Market fluff? It's an honest question. <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"> >Dale writes >    At any rate the best judge of that kind of subject determination in >>my mind woud be the guys in the factory who were so familiar with the old >> > design compared to the new one that there opinion would carry some >> real weight >>Ron writes >>I've always had a problem with this thinking. When would the guys in the >>factory working with the old ways ever get any experience with new ways to >>refine their opinions? What you will most likely get here is "This is the >>way we've always done it, so this way is best." And isn't that what we >>hear, for the most part? > > >         Wow I totally disagree with you on this. To assumne that belly > guys and final voicers can't tell the difference from piano to piano > especially over time or have a valid opinion is a huge assumption or > perhaps demeaning. No, that's not what I said. The factory belly workers (voicing doesn't belong here) normally get no chance whatsoever to experience anything new or different than what they work with every day. Not being exposed to any new ideas or methods, how can they possibly be even remotely qualified to judge between them and what they have always done?</BLOCKQUOTE>      Factory workers would get it if it was coming down the line.Well ,Recently I heard John Patton had said that When he worked at Mason Hamlin that the pianos that recieved there bellys and were immediately strung without sitting around for a while always sounded better to him. Now as to why that may or may not be is not the my point but he did have an opinion. To say someone as sensitive as a voicer wouldn't notice a difference if something indeed had changed in the belly department is for me  not logical. This point amounts to a spittin contest Ron <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"> Ron writes >>That's why I said "except in the bass if you don't float it". To many >>folks, thinning the panel edge means thinning the edge all around, which >>won't do you any favors in the treble. Just looking for clarification. > > >     I know first  rate rebuilders who thin the curve, spine, bass corner > and belly rail with exception of the high treble corner. Their sustain > charachteristics are exceptional. As I said, thinning won't do you any favors in the treble, at least not with rib scaling parameters that most rebuilders are using. >Even a high treble can require some thinning depending on your starting point. What conditions would require panel thinning in the treble? Is this something you do, or speculative?</BLOCKQUOTE>       If I've got a panel that's overly thick for a given size a piano. i. e. a .375 or more sikta panel in an M or L ,I consider that to thick all over as well for a smaller piano. A .340 ish treble thickness would do fine. I've heard thinner that were good as well. What specs. are you shooting for? <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">    Ok ,first I didn't mean any offense if I inadvertantly pushed a > button but ,since I opened this can  Let me attempt clarify "radical > redesign" and "extra costs". I aslo have respect for the work you guys > are doing and moreover your willingness to share it on list. As I've told > you before I've changed some methods and experimented with others due to > the thoughts and ideas shared. No offense taken. I'm looking for continuity.       I didn't ever say I was relying on the wisdom of the factory guys I > just didn't discount that they had an opinion and knew a thing or two.        Nor did I.</BLOCKQUOTE>                <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">It can't . the results have to speak for themselves . Did I hear an >agreement there?  Sustain , power and clarity are the proof. You did, contingent on results rather than assumption. Ron N </BLOCKQUOTE>     As I said , sometimes the performance benifits of some things are hard to quantify objectively.   Regards          Dale Erwin          </HTML>