<!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 6.00.2800.1264" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT><FONT face=Arial color=#800000>Thanks for =
the thoughts
Ron. A few comments/questions below:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#800000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#800000>Terry Farrell</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><BR><FONT face=Arial size=2>Lacking better sense, I'll bite. =
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#800000>He, he, he - =
gotcha!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I try orient the grain in the treble =
<BR>somewhere
between parallel to the bridge in the treble, and parallel to the =
<BR>bridge in
the tenor. Not for compression strength, but for ease of hand =
<BR>notching. The
idea being not having the grain too nearly parallel with the <BR>pin =
rows in the
treble (for notching), but nearly enough parallel with the <BR>bridge to =
get
enough long grain on the bridge to discourage splitting (for =
<BR>longevity).
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#800000>I guess I haven't notched enough =
bridges to
have noticed how grain angles may affect notching ease. So, making a =
notch that
is parallel to the grain is more difficult than if the grain is at a =
small
angle? More difficult because it is harder to push a chisel through the =
wood, or
more difficult to get a nice clean cut? I don't have a grip on it being =
harder
to push, but I can envision it being more difficult to get the clean =
cut. Which
is it, or is it both or something else?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>In the tenor, I go parallel to the =
bridge. There
are two <BR>reasons for this, three counting the notching concern. =
Parallel to
the <BR>bridge uses capping material more efficiently, and bridge caps =
don't
<BR>typically split and cause problems in the tenor anyway. Loose pins =
in the
<BR>tenor don't cause false beats like they do above the agraffe =
section. I
<BR>think it's frequency related, so it's less critical down there.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#800000>I'll buy that, but what does =
cause false
beats in the tenor? I service a number of "good" (or should be good) =
pianos
(Steinways, Yamahas, etc.) that have numerous false beats in strings in =
the
tenor agraffe section. Prominent slow beats usually.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Using laminated capping stock in the =
treble nearly
eliminates structural <BR>(splitting) concerns, but might aggravate =
notching
problems.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#800000>Like I say, I haven't done a lot =
of
notching, but I seem to recall that while notching my first laminated =
cap, I
noticed the increased effort required (actually, I think I came to that
conclusion on the first notch! - just to be clear, I would say that =
notching the
laminated cap requires more effort, but is not too =
difficult).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>High angle (90°) cross plies are =
hardest to notch
by hand, which is why I thought of <BR>low angle (10° or so) cross ply =
capping
as a decent compromise short of <BR>building a power notcher. I didn't =
invent
the idea, I just thought of it <BR>independently after others already =
had.
Anyway, that's my take. Yet another <BR>compromise.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT color=#800000 size=3>One that =
makes good
sense to me.</FONT><BR><BR>Ron N</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><BR><FONT face=Arial size=2>>My understanding of bridge cap =
material
grain angle is that is should <BR>>follow the curvature of the bridge =
as
close as is possible because maple <BR>>is strongest regarding =
compression
forces to application of that force <BR>>parallel to the
grain.<BR>><BR>>So in the upper treble where the strings are =
roughly
perpendicular to the <BR>>bridge, this would work just fine. But in =
the tenor
section where the <BR>>strings might be 45 degrees to the bridge, =
does this
rule hold true? Would <BR>>there not be some advantage to having the =
cap
grain perpendicular to the <BR>>strings?<BR>><BR>>Terry
Farrell</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>