<!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 5.50.4912.300" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV>Paul:<BR><BR>I got my February issue several days ago. You should
have yours soon.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>dave<BR><FONT face=Arial size=2>*********** REPLY SEPARATOR
***********<BR><BR>On 1/25/02 at 11:37 PM larudee@pacbell.net
wrote:</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid">Erwinspiano@AOL.COM
wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE="CITE">
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"
TYPE="CITE"><FONT face=Arial><FONT size=-1>The details are in the article,
but the disadvantage is that the 1/0 pin will be</FONT></FONT> <BR><FONT
face=Arial><FONT size=-1>less rigid. This can be a problem in a
Steinway type design where the distance</FONT></FONT> <BR><FONT
face=Arial><FONT size=-1>between the point of string tension and the pin
block is roughly three times</FONT></FONT> <BR><FONT face=Arial><FONT
size=-1>greater than in an open face design, and where there is no plate
bushing to</FONT></FONT> <BR><FONT face=Arial><FONT size=-1>mitigate the
leverage.</FONT></FONT>
<P><FONT face=Arial><FONT size=-1> Hi Paul -- I'll read the article
but would you mind saying this a different way as it's not clear to me. I
find that using no 1 pins in new blocks is not a problem unless fit too
tight but what pin isn't. I don't have any trouble with no. ones
otherwise. I'll read the article, really! I can't deny that no 2 are
stiffer but ones render nicely when fit well which is why I like
them.</FONT></FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT face=Arial><FONT
color=#000000><FONT size=-1>
>>>>>>>>>>Dale
Erwin</FONT></FONT></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE>Dale,
<P>Part of the problem, even when you read the article, is that it's in two
installments, and the February issue isn't out yet. The answer to your
question will probably lead to more questions, all of which are addressed
fully in the article. The simplest answer, however, is that in a
Steinway the string height above the pin block - not the plate - is roughly
three times greater than it is in an open face design like a Bechstein.
Since the string tension is roughly the same, the leverage exerted by the
string on the pin is three times as great. If the pin sizes are the same
in both cases, pin flex will produce roughly three times as much string
movement in the Steinway as in the Bechstein - i.e. it is less stable.
Going to a larger, stiffer pin size will partly compensate for that.
<P>Chances are that at this point we get into "but what about...," in which
case I get to rewrite the whole article on line. I would just as soon
wait for the February Journal. There will probably still be plenty to
debate, but at least not the stuff I've already covered in the article.
<P>Best regards,
<P>Paul<FONT size=2 Arial></P></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></BODY></HTML>
<PRE>
_____________________________
David M. Porritt
dporritt@mail.smu.edu
Meadows School of the Arts
Southern Methodist University
Dallas, TX 75275
_____________________________</PRE>