Re: [pianotech] Hi/Low Tension Pianos
Joseph Garrett
Don,
Why do you want to know all of this?<G> It is not cut/dry, so, unless you want one of us to write a book,...?<G> There are many books on the subject...Fenner, White, the series of articles: " the calclulating technician,...etc.
Best,
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: Don Bee
Sent: Dec 12, 2013 7:48 AM
To: pian...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [pianotech] Hi/Low Tension Pianos
I've heard various tech's mention either high or low tension strung pianos.
Are there advantages or disadvantages to either one? Are bass strings high
tension and treble low? And do larger pianos (concert) always have high
tension string scaling? Are Yamahas all low tension strung? How about
Steinway? Several questions, I know, but all have been rummaging around my
thoughts for some time. Don
Captain of the Tool Police Squares R I gpianoworks.com
Ron Nossaman
> Don,
>
> Why do you want to know all of this?<G> It is not cut/dry, so, unless
> you want one of us to write a book,...?<G> There are many books on
> the subject...Fenner, White, the series of articles: " the
> calclulating technician,...etc.
It's rare enough that someone asks a question out of curiosity rather
than from the customer's living room when they need to know which way to
turn a screw to tighten it, and what to charge. Try not to discourage
the concept. He asked me privately when he didn't get an answer on list,
and I told him everything I know about high tension vs low tension in 25
words or less. The details of scaling is a different thing.
Ron N
Don
Would you mind repeating those 25 words in public? Please?
Don Rose
Joseph Garrett
My apologies. I did not mean to dismiss his query, but was trying to say that "it's complicated" and to get him to be a bit more specific. I have no doubt you could condense that into that small of a dialogue.<G>
Actually, it would be a good topic to explore within the scope of this list, imo.<G>
Best Regards,
Joe
-----Original Message-----
>From: Ron Nossaman <rnos...@cox.net>
>Sent: Dec 13, 2013 7:07 PM
>To: pian...@googlegroups.com
>Subject: Re: [pianotech] Hi/Low Tension Pianos
>
>On 12/13/2013 8:19 PM, Joseph Garrett wrote:
>> Don,
>>
>> Why do you want to know all of this?<G> It is not cut/dry, so, unless
>> you want one of us to write a book,...?<G> There are many books on
>> the subject...Fenner, White, the series of articles: " the
>> calclulating technician,...etc.
>
>It's rare enough that someone asks a question out of curiosity rather
>than from the customer's living room when they need to know which way to
>turn a screw to tighten it, and what to charge. Try not to discourage
>the concept. He asked me privately when he didn't get an answer on list,
>and I told him everything I know about high tension vs low tension in 25
>words or less. The details of scaling is a different thing.
>Ron N
Brian Trout
Hmmm... "The Calculating Technician". Was that a series in the Journal a good while back, like maybe decade or so? I kinda remember reading something with that title that I enjoyed but don't remember a lot about it.
> From: joega...@earthlink.net
Joseph Garrett
"The Calculating Technician" was a series in the PTJ that has been put into a book, (of sorts). It is available from the Home Office. Of course there are many other publications that are important as well. Having knowledge of Scales and such, makes one better understand what is really happening in the tuning process, imo. The Hi/Low Tension aspect is simply a part of the whole picture.<G>
Best,
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Trout
Sent: Dec 13, 2013 9:43 PM
To: "pian...@googlegroups.com"
Subject: RE: [pianotech] Hi/Low Tension Pianos
Actually, I'd enjoy the discussion, too, and had also wondered what Ron's 25 words of wisdom happened to be. :-)
Hmmm... "The Calculating Technician". Was that a series in the Journal a good while back, like maybe decade or so? I kinda remember reading something with that title that I enjoyed but don't remember a lot about it.
> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 20:09:10 -0800
> From: joega...@earthlink.net
> To: pian...@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: [pianotech] Hi/Low Tension Pianos
>
> Ron and Don,
> My apologies. I did not mean to dismiss his query, but was trying to say that "it's complicated" and to get him to be a bit more specific. I have no doubt you could condense that into that small of a dialogue.
> Actually, it would be a good topic to explore within the scope of this list, imo.
> Best Regards,
> Joe
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> >From: Ron Nossaman
> >Sent: Dec 13, 2013 7:07 PM
> >To: pian...@googlegroups.com
> >Subject: Re: [pianotech] Hi/Low Tension Pianos
> >
> >On 12/13/2013 8:19 PM, Joseph Garrett wrote:
> >> Don,
> >>
> >> Why do you want to know all of this? It is not cut/dry, so, unless
> >> you want one of us to write a book,...? There are many books on
> >> the subject...Fenner, White, the series of articles: " the
> >> calclulating technician,...etc.
> >
> >Joe,
> >It's rare enough that someone asks a question out of curiosity rather
> >than from the customer's living room when they need to know which way to
> >turn a screw to tighten it, and what to charge. Try not to discourage
> >the concept. He asked me privately when he didn't get an answer on list,
> >and I told him everything I know about high tension vs low tension in 25
> >words or less. The details of scaling is a different thing.
> >Ron N
>
>
> Captain of the Tool Police
> Squares R I
> gpianoworks.com
Isaac OLEG
Isaac OLEG
Le samedi 14 décembre 2013 03:19:23 UTC+1, Joseph Garrett a écrit :
Ron Nossaman
Maybe I can eventually get this thing sent to the right place and under
the right subject heading. Must preserve the precious threading, after
all. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to get more coffee..... Lots
more coffee..........
Sorry guys. I haven't blown you off, I just went to bed early and sort
of neglected you. Fact is, I don't have definitions of hi/low tension
scales. Here's what I sent to Don.
========================================================
Hi Don,
It's sort of like "What size is a baby grand?". Higher tensions tend to
be louder and brash, while lower tensions tend to be a bit mellower,
favoring lower partials. I like lower tension scales for the sound, but
you need to match the soundboard to the scale, so you tend to keep about
the same tension levels as were in the piano originally. In rescaling or
redesigning with a new belly, I typically decrease the bass core wires
and bass tensions some. this brings out what fundamental there is to be
had, especially if I get to put a redesigned board and bridges under the
new scale, but the pianists that insist the piano blows their eyebrows
back don't like it. They like the clangy, painful to listen to bass that
is in so many pianos these days, but I don't. It really screws up the
balance with the rest of the scale.
The Yamaha scales I have are sort of low/medium tension, and tend to
have some ridiculously high break% tensions in the wrapped strings.
Steinways, the small pianos are low tension, and the big ones high,
presumably to get more volume for the stage. The highest tension scale I
have was in a 9' Everett, at 48,229 lbs, where a Steinway D has
something like 46,104, and an M has 36,187. I don't have a big Yamaha
scale, so I don't know if they are high tension or not. Like the thing
with the "baby grand" I tend not to use the terms "high tension", or
"low tension" because they mean different things to different people and
don't really tell you anything. It's got to work in the piano with the
soundboard and hammers whatever the overall number is.
Not much detail, but that's what I've got.
Ron N
==========================================================
As Joe said, the details of the individual scaling and how everything
fits together are far more important than whether it's high or low
tension. For that stuff to make sense, you really have to work with it
first hand. A general discussion will be, if interesting, meaningless to
most, and those doing it have different approaches among themselves.
Ron N
Euphonious Thumpe
| Ron, please let us know your opinion of that 9' Everett? I helped the family of an astonishing pianist (who started subbing for Roy Bargy in the Paul Whiteman orchestra at age 13, in 1929, then went on to work with Tommy Dorsey, Bing Crosby, etc.!) sell it after he passed away. I saw that it was cosmetically beautiful, but never had a chance to hear it restored. Thumpe Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPad |
Ron Nossaman
> Ron, please let us know your opinion of that 9' Everett? I helped the
> family of an astonishing pianist (who started subbing for Roy Bargy in
> the Paul Whiteman orchestra at age 13, in 1929, then went on to work
> with Tommy Dorsey, Bing Crosby, etc.!) sell it after he passed away. I
> saw that it was cosmetically beautiful, but never had a chance to hear
> it restored.
It was a rescaling I did for a big rebuild shop somewhere to the
southwest of me, for which I was never paid, incidentally (nor for two
more I did at the same time). My biggest concern was the 58mm C-8
speaking length, at 83% break. I don't know if they ever got the thing
pulled up to pitch without breaking strings, but I found it difficult to
care after it became clear I wasn't going to be paid for the work. Yes,
I warned them before I did anything that there was a problem that
couldn't be fixed without changing speaking lengths, but it didn't seem
to mean anything to them.
Ron N
Euphonious Thumpe
| Hmmmmm. I have no tangible evidence, but it sounds suspiciously like the piano I "brokered". (Sorry to hear of your problems --- I assure you I had nothing to do with that end of it!) The astonishing pianist was Fred DeLand. Studied Bargy's parts with Whiteman from records as a child, then approached the band (with Bing on vocals then, Bix on cornet, Joe Venuti, Eddie Lang etc.) when it was doing a tent show in Charlotte, in the late 20's. Paul was so impressed, he let him play the last set! I met then "Crusty old Fred" by accident, when I wandered into Jim's Pianos in Atlanta, 20 years ago. I was diddling around on "Sweet Lorrraine" on a fat tail Chickering, when one of the old guys playing checkers in the corner came over, and in a gruff voice said "Let me show you how Tatum showed me how to play that." (Yikes!) Turns out Fred and Art were buddies In Chicago, playing at clubs across the street from each other for 2 years. (To say the least, I was humbled.) I offered to record Fred, but when he asked "Are you in the union?" and I said no, he refused. Pity. |
From: Ron Nossaman <rnos...@cox.net>;
To: <pian...@googlegroups.com>;
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Hi/Low Tension Pianos
Ron Nossaman
> Hmmmmm. I have no tangible evidence, but it sounds suspiciously like the
> piano I "brokered".
Ron N
Brian Trout
> From: rnos...@cox.net
Don Bee
And I, too, most appreciate your sage comments Ron, as well as those from the other folks. I now have a better handle on the subject and do understand that complex deliberations come in to play when tension scales are considered. In my opinion, it’s easy to see you, as well as Joe, know what you’re talking about. Don
From: pian...@googlegroups.com [mailto:pian...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Brian Trout
Sent: Saturday, December 14, 2013 8:24 PM
To: pian...@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [pianotech] Hi/Low Tension Pianos
Thanks, Ron. I do appreciate your thoughts. Yes, I know it can get pretty complicated but the general overview is appreciated, especially from someone who has no doubt had some experience with various scales and tensions and the outcome.
Ron Nossaman
> And I, too, most appreciate your sage comments Ron, as well as those
> from the other folks. I now have a better handle on the subject and do
> understand that complex deliberations come in to play when tension
> scales are considered. In my opinion, it’s easy to see you, as well as
> Joe, know what you’re talking about. Don
Sorry I don't have anything more informational to offer. I always
considered the high and low tension designation to be pretty meaningless
as it's mostly used. Something a tech could talk learnedly about to seem
knowledgeable without actually saying anything, or something a salesman
could point to in the brochure to impress a customer who knows even less
than the salesman. I do, however, encourage anyone interested in scaling
to acquire or build a spreadsheet with which to explore the subject.
When you start looking at the numbers and charts of various scales and
compare what you find in actual pianos with the mass hallucinations
discussed on list and in various books, it's easy to arrive at the
conclusion that there is more smoke than fire in a lot of the reported
approaches and "truths" surrounding scaling. Like a lot of what we
experience, there is an excess of bling hung on otherwise fairly
straightforward processes, and "everyone else does it this way so it
must be right" rather than approaching it as simply and rationally as
you can manage. It's complex, but nowhere near as mystical and
superhuman as it's been depicted to try and maintain the "priesthood"
and disguise the fact that there is considerable guessing going on in
the various approaches. That's not to say that there aren't rational
approaches at work, but if it was automatic checklist cut and dried
connect the dots, all scales would look alike.
Oh, one more thing. I rescaled a square for someone a while back that
had an original overall tension of 20,284 lbs, making it a lowest
tension scale. <G> I expect Joe has plenty of files like that.
One more one more thing: I suggested a spreadsheet rather than one of
the commercial scaling programs for the flexibility inherent in
spreadsheets. You can add or modify as you see fit, so the tool can grow
with you as you develop psychotic attitudes of your own about the
process, and you can chart anything you like as you see fit, modify the
Z formula, and add other functions like downbearing loads and such. For
instance, I've never seen a commercial program that charts tensions and
Z as unisons, only as single strings. Looking at such a chart doesn't
tell me a thing about how the transitions connect. Since I hear unisons
in the finished product, that's what I want to chart and track while I'm
building the scale. "Right" or "wrong", this is what works for me, and I
think it works very well.
This job is one of the best toys I ever had, and there are still plenty
of aspects of it I haven't gotten around to playing with, but it's all
available with some thinking and investment of time and effort. You just
have to want to learn badly enough to go for it!
PS: You can have the buffing and refinishing and screw slot alignment,
but I want the rest.
Ron N
Brian Trout
What would be interesting would be combining the guys at Chickering 100+ years ago having the capacity to crank out new piano designs so easily with the modern redesign tools that Del, Ron O. and a few others have come up with today.
> From: rnos...@cox.net
> To: pian...@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: [pianotech] Hi/Low Tension Pianos
Joseph Garrett
"Oh, one more thing. I rescaled a square for someone a while back that
had an original overall tension of 20,284 lbs, making it a lowest
tension scale. <G> I expect Joe has plenty of files like that."
As a matter of fact I do. Given that most square grands have two string unisons, the overall tension should not be compared to modern three string, (and some times four string), unison pianos. There are a few square grands that have three string unisons in the top section, but those are few and far between.
The low overall tension of that square grand was , hopefully, because of the lack of sufficient bracing and weak structural integrity. That would be what would prompt me to do such a low scale. All to avoid the dreaded "Cheek Lift" phenomenon.<G> (or the "Cracked Plate" phenomenon.<G>)
Part of this conversation should address the phenomenon of the "Window of Tone", (my term<G>), in any given piano string, (wire). Anyone who has put a string on a piano has experienced that phenomenon but probably didn't really think about it. What I'm referring to is when we crank on the tuning hammer and bring the tension up, we will pluck the string and hear a sound something like: "buuuurrrrrrrRING". At the point of the "..RING", we have reached the bottom level of the "Window of Tone". If we continue to crank on the tuning hammer while the string is vibrating, we will hear: "RINGGGggghh...SNAP!" At the point of the "..Ggggh..", (before the final "h"), we have reached the highest level of the "Window of Tone", which occurs just before the string has reached is maximum elongation before breaking. If you haven't done this experiment you should do it just for giggles.<G>
The point I'm trying to make is that if the tension, in relation to the strength capabilities of the string, is too LOW or too HIGH, the tone suffers markedly. Therefore, a too low tension will not have any color of tone. The sound will be lifeless and uninteresting to listen too. Inversely, a too high tension piano tends to jangle the hearing and cause excessive emotional STRESS. It is my belief that there is a small "Window of Tone" that is appropriate and desirable. That is what I strive for in approaching the various scales I attempt to put in harmonic balance.
The entire package of piano structure will dictate, to some degree the tonal pallet and the ability of the piano to "Project". It is part of the scale design to take all factors of the structure into consideration. This is done for "safety" considerations as well as tonal considerations.
As Ron said, there is no magical formulae or rule that governs all of this. The proof is in the final sound of the piano at pitch and in tune. Even identical pianos will have differences in tonal character/structure even though they have been meticulously manufactured. Such is the case with Yamahas. The nuances of difference are difficult to perceive as opposed to, let's say comparing a Steinway and a Mason & Hamlin. Or....you choose<G>.
Onward with the discussion
Best,
Joe
Ron Nossaman
>
> The low overall tension of that square grand was , hopefully, because of
> the lack of sufficient bracing and weak structural integrity.
revision was overall about 100 lbs less, with half of that difference in
the bass. Two string unisons, 85 note, with the treble break% in the
35-44% range rather than the 50-70% of a modern grand. I didn't design
the thing, just got some reasonable core wires in the bass and smoothed
it out a whole lot. It was reported to sound terrific.
Ron N
Joseph Garrett
Yes, quite typical of what I do on a lot of them. Actually, there isn't much to do in the realm of improvement on Squares. They are what they are and we can only try to make them "less bad".<G>
Best,
Joe
Terry Farrell
Terry Farrell
Ron Nossaman
> Was that the one you did for me Ron? It did sound very, very nice.
>
> Terry Farrell
worked out.
Ron N
Will Truitt
Joe, your “Window of Tone”, or “sweet spot” as others might refer to it, is basically what “hybrid scaling” is about, using wire types of differing breaking percentages to best accommodate the necessities of a particular piano’s string scale. At a particular place in the scale, the type wire that offers the best breaking percentage for a particular tension is used. Paulello wire offers 5 different wire types 2, 1, 0, M, and XM. Type 2 would mostly be used in historical low tension scalings such as your square. All of the others are used in modern pianos as part of the hybrid scaling. The XM wire is the wire with the highest breaking percentage, and can be used on pianos with obscenely high tensions in the high treble where breaking strings are an issue, or the rescaler wants to increase volume in the upper registers. In our rebuilding, the hybrid scaling offers an opportunity to correct scaling problems that are audible, and which may or may not be able to be addressed by other means.
Will Truitt
Joseph Garrett
Will,
I agree with most of what you have said with one exception." Type 2 would mostly be used in historical low tension scalings such as your square." I disagree with this conceptual idea in most Square Grands, as modern alloy wire was used on a large percentage of Square Grands. Whereas, the Square Pianos had many variable alloys of lesser quality, commonly known as "Iron Wire". The later would be a candidate for "Type 2" in a lot of cases, but not all. Careful examination and calculations are necessary to determine the use of such wire. As you probably have surmised, I am not a big fan of Stainless Wire. My thoughts are that it is no appropriate for achieving intended tone. Also, the differences in labeling of Square Pianos v.s. Square Grands is an intentional one and should be carefully considered.
Best,
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: Will Truitt
Sent: Dec 16, 2013 11:38 AM
To: pian...@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [pianotech] re: Hi/Low Tension Pianos
Joe, your “Window of Tone”, or “sweet spot” as others might refer to it, is basically what “hybrid scaling” is about, using wire types of differing breaking percentages to best accommodate the necessities of a particular piano’s string scale. At a particular place in the scale, the type wire that offers the best breaking percentage for a particular tension is used. Paulello wire offers 5 different wire types 2, 1, 0, M, and XM. Type 2 would mostly be used in historical low tension scalings such as your square. All of the others are used in modern pianos as part of the hybrid scaling. The XM wire is the wire with the highest breaking percentage, and can be used on pianos with obscenely high tensions in the high treble where breaking strings are an issue, or the rescaler wants to increase volume in the upper registers. In our rebuilding, the hybrid scaling offers an opportunity to correct scaling problems that are audible, and which may or may not be able to be addressed by other means.
Will Truitt
From: pian...@googlegroups.com [mailto:pian...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Joseph Garrett
Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2013 2:05 PM
To: pian...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [pianotech] re: Hi/Low Tension Pianos
"Oh, one more thing. I rescaled a square for someone a while back that
had an original overall tension of 20,284 lbs, making it a lowest
tension scale. I expect Joe has plenty of files like that."
As a matter of fact I do. Given that most square grands have two string unisons, the overall tension should not be compared to modern three string, (and some times four string), unison pianos. There are a few square grands that have three string unisons in the top section, but those are few and far between.
The low overall tension of that square grand was , hopefully, because of the lack of sufficient bracing and weak structural integrity. That would be what would prompt me to do such a low scale. All to avoid the dreaded "Cheek Lift" phenomenon. (or the "Cracked Plate" phenomenon.)
Part of this conversation should address the phenomenon of the "Window of Tone", (my term), in any given piano string, (wire). Anyone who has put a string on a piano has experienced that phenomenon but probably didn't really think about it. What I'm referring to is when we crank on the tuning hammer and bring the tension up, we will pluck the string and hear a sound something like: "buuuurrrrrrrRING". At the point of the "..RING", we have reached the bottom level of the "Window of Tone". If we continue to crank on the tuning hammer while the string is vibrating, we will hear: "RINGGGggghh...SNAP!" At the point of the "..Ggggh..", (before the final "h"), we have reached the highest level of the "Window of Tone", which occurs just before the string has reached is maximum elongation before breaking. If you haven't done this experiment you should do it just for giggles.
The point I'm trying to make is that if the tension, in relation to the strength capabilities of the string, is too LOW or too HIGH, the tone suffers markedly. Therefore, a too low tension will not have any color of tone. The sound will be lifeless and uninteresting to listen too. Inversely, a too high tension piano tends to jangle the hearing and cause excessive emotional STRESS. It is my belief that there is a small "Window of Tone" that is appropriate and desirable. That is what I strive for in approaching the various scales I attempt to put in harmonic balance.
The entire package of piano structure will dictate, to some degree the tonal pallet and the ability of the piano to "Project". It is part of the scale design to take all factors of the structure into consideration. This is done for "safety" considerations as well as tonal considerations.
As Ron said, there is no magical formulae or rule that governs all of this. The proof is in the final sound of the piano at pitch and in tune. Even identical pianos will have differences in tonal character/structure even though they have been meticulously manufactured. Such is the case with Yamahas. The nuances of difference are difficult to perceive as opposed to, let's say comparing a Steinway and a Mason & Hamlin. Or....you choose.
Onward with the discussion
Best,
Joe
Captain of the Tool Police
Squares R I
gpianoworks.com
Ron Nossaman
> Also, the differences in labeling of Square
> Pianos v.s. Square Grands is an intentional one and should be
> carefully considered.
Ron N
Will Truitt
I stand corrected. Your knowledge of squares and their scales is vastly superior to mine. Your remark about the need for careful examination and calculations is would be true for any use of this wire.
The Paulello wire is not a stainless steel wire – the Pure Sound wire is. Paulello makes two types of wire, “polished” and nickel plated. I have heard and used the polished, I have not heard the nickel plated.
For some reason, people tend to lump together Paulello wire and Pure Sound in their minds as being substantially the same. They may share some of the same usages, but I wouldn’t go beyond that. Pure Sound is an Stainless Steel alloy and they list its composition on the Pure Sound website, Paulello wire is an alloy, but I have not seen anything where he tells us its composition, or how the breaking percentages are controlled in the making of the various types. Paulello does say that the M wire is substantially the same as modern piano wire, although greater care is taken at each step of the process of making this wire.
My usages of this wire are different than yours with a square – I am working on “modern” pianos made within the last 120 years or so, which have varying “higher” tension scales by way of comparison to the older instruments of which you speak.
Will
Joseph Garrett
Not trying to pick a scab and most certainly would not defile anything Newton, but that is olde bias that is only mildly appropriate. Most techs have never seen or heard a properly functioning Square Piano or Square Grand. Consequently, the attitude is mostly negative due to ignorance, imo.
Best,
Joe
-----Original Message-----
>From: Ron Nossaman <rnos...@cox.net>
>Sent: Dec 16, 2013 12:12 PM
>To: pian...@googlegroups.com
>
>On 12/16/2013 2:02 PM, Joseph Garrett wrote:
>
>> Pianos v.s. Square Grands is an intentional one and should be
>> carefully considered.
>
>Ron N
Joseph Garrett
Will,
Thank you for that.<G> Would you agree that Paulello Wire and Pure Sound wire result in a different sound and tonal pallet? That is, generally, what I was referring to.
Best,
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: Will Truitt
Sent: Dec 16, 2013 12:43 PM
To: pian...@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [pianotech] re: Hi/Low Tension Pianos
I stand corrected. Your knowledge of squares and their scales is vastly superior to mine. Your remark about the need for careful examination and calculations is would be true for any use of this wire.
The Paulello wire is not a stainless steel wire – the Pure Sound wire is. Paulello makes two types of wire, “polished” and nickel plated. I have heard and used the polished, I have not heard the nickel plated.
For some reason, people tend to lump together Paulello wire and Pure Sound in their minds as being substantially the same. They may share some of the same usages, but I wouldn’t go beyond that. Pure Sound is an Stainless Steel alloy and they list its composition on the Pure Sound website, Paulello wire is an alloy, but I have not seen anything where he tells us its composition, or how the breaking percentages are controlled in the making of the various types. Paulello does say that the M wire is substantially the same as modern piano wire, although greater care is taken at each step of the process of making this wire.
My usages of this wire are different than yours with a square – I am working on “modern” pianos made within the last 120 years or so, which have varying “higher” tension scales by way of comparison to the older instruments of which you speak.
Will
From: pian...@googlegroups.com [mailto:pian...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Joseph Garrett
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2013 3:03 PM
To: pian...@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [pianotech] re: Hi/Low Tension Pianos
Will,
I agree with most of what you have said with one exception." Type 2 would mostly be used in historical low tension scalings such as your square." I disagree with this conceptual idea in most Square Grands, as modern alloy wire was used on a large percentage of Square Grands. Whereas, the Square Pianos had many variable alloys of lesser quality, commonly known as "Iron Wire". The later would be a candidate for "Type 2" in a lot of cases, but not all. Careful examination and calculations are necessary to determine the use of such wire. As you probably have surmised, I am not a big fan of Stainless Wire. My thoughts are that it is no appropriate for achieving intended tone. Also, the differences in labeling of Square Pianos v.s. Square Grands is an intentional one and should be carefully considered.
Best,
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: Will Truitt
Sent: Dec 16, 2013 11:38 AM
To: pian...@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [pianotech] re: Hi/Low Tension Pianos
Joe, your “Window of Tone”, or “sweet spot” as others might refer to it, is basically what “hybrid scaling” is about, using wire types of differing breaking percentages to best accommodate the necessities of a particular piano’s string scale. At a particular place in the scale, the type wire that offers the best breaking percentage for a particular tension is used. Paulello wire offers 5 different wire types 2, 1, 0, M, and XM. Type 2 would mostly be used in historical low tension scalings such as your square. All of the others are used in modern pianos as part of the hybrid scaling. The XM wire is the wire with the highest breaking percentage, and can be used on pianos with obscenely high tensions in the high treble where breaking strings are an issue, or the rescaler wants to increase volume in the upper registers. In our rebuilding, the hybrid scaling offers an opportunity to correct scaling problems that are audible, and which may or may not be able to be addressed by other means.
Will Truitt
From: pian...@googlegroups.com [mailto:pian...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Joseph Garrett
Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2013 2:05 PM
To: pian...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [pianotech] re: Hi/Low Tension Pianos
"Oh, one more thing. I rescaled a square for someone a while back that
had an original overall tension of 20,284 lbs, making it a lowest
tension scale. I expect Joe has plenty of files like that."
As a matter of fact I do. Given that most square grands have two string unisons, the overall tension should not be compared to modern three string, (and some times four string), unison pianos. There are a few square grands that have three string unisons in the top section, but those are few and far between.
The low overall tension of that square grand was , hopefully, because of the lack of sufficient bracing and weak structural integrity. That would be what would prompt me to do such a low scale. All to avoid the dreaded "Cheek Lift" phenomenon. (or the "Cracked Plate" phenomenon.)
Part of this conversation should address the phenomenon of the "Window of Tone", (my term), in any given piano string, (wire). Anyone who has put a string on a piano has experienced that phenomenon but probably didn't really think about it. What I'm referring to is when we crank on the tuning hammer and bring the tension up, we will pluck the string and hear a sound something like: "buuuurrrrrrrRING". At the point of the "..RING", we have reached the bottom level of the "Window of Tone". If we continue to crank on the tuning hammer while the string is vibrating, we will hear: "RINGGGggghh...SNAP!" At the point of the "..Ggggh..", (before the final "h"), we have reached the highest level of the "Window of Tone", which occurs just before the string has reached is maximum elongation before breaking. If you haven't done this experiment you should do it just for giggles.
The point I'm trying to make is that if the tension, in relation to the strength capabilities of the string, is too LOW or too HIGH, the tone suffers markedly. Therefore, a too low tension will not have any color of tone. The sound will be lifeless and uninteresting to listen too. Inversely, a too high tension piano tends to jangle the hearing and cause excessive emotional STRESS. It is my belief that there is a small "Window of Tone" that is appropriate and desirable. That is what I strive for in approaching the various scales I attempt to put in harmonic balance.
The entire package of piano structure will dictate, to some degree the tonal pallet and the ability of the piano to "Project". It is part of the scale design to take all factors of the structure into consideration. This is done for "safety" considerations as well as tonal considerations.
As Ron said, there is no magical formulae or rule that governs all of this. The proof is in the final sound of the piano at pitch and in tune. Even identical pianos will have differences in tonal character/structure even though they have been meticulously manufactured. Such is the case with Yamahas. The nuances of difference are difficult to perceive as opposed to, let's say comparing a Steinway and a Mason & Hamlin. Or....you choose.
Onward with the discussion
Best,
Joe
Captain of the Tool Police
Squares R I
gpianoworks.com
Captain of the Tool Police
Squares R I
gpianoworks.com
Ron Nossaman
> Ron, Not trying to pick a scab and most certainly would not defile
> anything Newton, but that is olde bias that is only mildly
> appropriate. Most techs have never seen or heard a properly
> functioning Square Piano or Square Grand. Consequently, the attitude
> is mostly negative due to ignorance, imo.
Ron N
Joseph Garrett
You know, that is true, except that I'm constantly hearing about all of the maladies techs experience tuning modern "godzilla pianos" and wonder why they don't malign said modern trash like they do the Square Grands, etc. Seems like a "double standard".<G>
-----Original Message-----
>From: Ron Nossaman <rnos...@cox.net>
>Sent: Dec 16, 2013 1:01 PM
>To: pian...@googlegroups.com
Will Truitt
I have not heard the Pure Sound wire, so I cannot comment on that. If your different sound question is directed towards squares and their use of iron wire or other wires, I cannot comment because my knowledge is so limited as to be worthless. As pertaining to modern pianos and their higher tensions, I would say yes that there is a different tonal palette with more color, clarity, and purity of tone. The sound is different but not in a big dramatic way. It’s more like a similar sound but more of everything. The differences are more pronounced in the problem areas like the low tenor and the low bass in that the improvement in tone is more dramatic. I think the greatest virtue of the wire is that, by scaling to match breaking percentages as closely as possible using a much larger assortment of wire types and sizes, we end up with a beautifully blended sound – if the scaling is finessed and done right. It doesn’t shout but it sure does have a sweet musical smile. Does it improve the sound of the piano and step up our rebuilding work a couple of notches? To my ear, absolutely yes.
Isaac OLEG
Isaac OLEG
On a high tension scale one can find a BS% raised soon to 70 % ++ in the high mediums and treble.
Will Truitt
Hi Isaac:
The highest BP wire is the XM. It is designed to be used in pianos where string breakage is an issue from heavy playing (such as a concert instrument or for a player who is a pounder). The higher BP reduces the possibility for breakage in these situations. If you look at the stringing optimization page on Stephen Paulello’s website and direct yourself to the Steinways, you will see two scalings available for each model, normal and intense: http://www.stephenpaulello.com/en/fiches-de-montage The XM is substituted mostly from 15 or 15 ½ down to 13 gauges.
The XM is also used for pianos where the speaking lengths are too long in the high treble and the Breaking Percentage is too close to the breaking point, and the possibility of shortening the speaking lengths to reduce tension and BP is not available.
The Nickel plated wire is wire is not as limited in types and sizes as you seem to indicate. The Paulello website lists it available in XM, M, O, and 1 in a broad range of sizes.
In my experience, all of the types of wire I have used seem to stabilize more quickly than Roslau or Mapes wire. And more evenly, since we have scaled by BP, amongst the other variables.
I have used the 1, 0 , and M wire in a completed piano so far. The M wire seems maybe a smidgen softer than its counterparts, the 0 wire softer still, and the 1 wire even softer. Even though we would be using the 1 wire sparingly in the low tenor in a rescaing, I have to say I love the sound of it, it has a wonderful creamy quality to it that is quite seductive.
JD Grandt offers bass strings made with the Paulello 0 and M cores. John Delacour made a set of bass strings for me to onto a 7’3” Bechstein C rescaling, using the 0 and M cores. I’ll be putting them on the piano soon.
For the Steingraeber I believe you must be referring to the XM wire, as the M wire would not be substantially different than whatever Roslau would be using on that piano.
I agree with your remark to use all of the same brand throughout the piano. Even though the M type is not too different from its Roslau counterpart, there seems to be a greater homogeneity of tone created by using all from the same maker. And the Paulello wire is just better wire made to a higher standard - and you pay more for that. And most definitely use it in the bass. It will depend on the piano, but the use of the 0 cores adds an audibly positive benefit to the monochords and blends into the bichords better.
Isaac OLEG
I did not even heard of the XM type, and thought the nickeled version was only for VM type.
When the Steingraeber was done that XM type was not available, but it succeeded with the M type. Just slightly stronger than Roslau
Regards.
Isaac
Encore Pianos
I believe the XM wire has come out only in the past year or so.
What is VM type?
Will
-----Original Message-----
From: pian...@googlegroups.com [mailto:pian...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Isaac OLEG
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2013 8:26 AM
To: pian...@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [pianotech] re: Hi/Low Tension Pianos