<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML style="FONT-SIZE: medium; FONT-FAMILY: AGaramond Bold"><HEAD> <META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; = charset=iso-8859-1"> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2802" name=GENERATOR> <STYLE></STYLE> </HEAD> <BODY bgColor=#d8d0c8> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>How is it we "know" how pianos = originally sounded 100+ years ago? I know some piano tuners are old, = but........</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Terry Farrell</FONT></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; = BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV> <DIV style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: = black"> </DIV> <DIV><STRONG><FONT face=Arial size=3>I have some input into the = subject of 'ringing dampers'.</FONT></STRONG></DIV> <DIV><STRONG><FONT face=Arial size=3>Some of the North American = pianos, of the earlier part of the 20th century, had dampers that were not as = efficient also.</FONT></STRONG></DIV> <DIV><STRONG><FONT face=Arial size=3>They had terms like resonant = whatever. They liked the 'ring', in those days.</FONT></STRONG></DIV> <DIV><STRONG><FONT face=Arial size=3>Just because a piano was = manufactured, as the birdcage etc., with an after ring, does not mean that we have to = stick with that. The customer should not have to put up with this after = ring, if they don't like it, just because that is the way the piano was 'meant' = to be.</FONT></STRONG></DIV> <DIV><STRONG><FONT face=Arial size=3>If we can modify, or reduce = this 'noise', then we should.</FONT></STRONG></DIV> <DIV><STRONG><FONT face=Arial size=3>This German piano I tuned = recently, was a birdcage, Ibach I think, had a minimal after ring, so the birdcage, = can obviously be made to have a more efficient damper system.</FONT></STRONG></DIV> <DIV>John M. Ross<BR>Windsor, Nova Scotia, Canada<BR><A = href="mailto:jrpiano@win.eastlink.ca">jrpiano@win.eastlink.ca</A></DIV>= <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; = BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV> <DIV style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: = black"> </DIV> <DIV><FONT size=2>Wow, that's surprising.  I thought it was a = deficiency of modern upright dampers that they don't damp (not = dampen! :-) near the strike point, like grand dampers do.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT size=2>--Cy--</FONT></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; = BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- = </DIV> <DIV style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: = black"> </DIV> <P> <DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3>...the closer you get to the string = termination the less effective the damper will be to absorb the vibrating energy. This = fact was established in the time of around 1850 or so. Sooooooo, again, The = Over Ring IS intentional and should only be moderated, NOT eliminated, = because it is impossible, given the action geometry & physical characteristics. </FONT></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>