<HTML>In a message dated 5/1/2002 12:46:03 PM Pacific Standard Time, Wimblees@AOL.COM writes:                                    Willem        Denial is a wonderful coping mechanism! Grin. I've used it alot.      If a string has lost all its stretch it has nominal resilence and doesn't suffer over pulling much in the pitch raise or tuning process. Accept in poorly scaled  pianos the strings in the treble are not at any higher tension than any place in the tenor/treble sections. Frequently uprights have huge tension jumps in the scale usually just before a wire size change. These are often the first too snap dampers or not.     You make a good case for fatigues because as you say the wires do not commonly break in the middle but almost always at the termination , tuning pin or bridge pin, where the wire expeiences the most retriction of its movement and subsequent fatigue/ breakage.    Nominal playing as you say cetrainly reduces the fatigue factor unless design defects are present. Also a factor for string breakage in the treble is little bitty hard hammers and a quicker traveling wave. The string doesn't have time to recover from its distoration as its played in the rapid fashion you mention.    Just my two cents worth              >>>>Dale>>>>>>>>>>>>.. <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">If is it the "fatigue" that causes a string to break, then the strings in the middle of a practice room piano would break all the time. The strings that break most often are the ones at the top. It's the high tension, played hard, for a long period of time in a row, without dampers to slow the string down. I don't believe strings will become fatigued on a piano that's played nominally, even one that's a hundred years old. Wim   </BLOCKQUOTE> </HTML>