Why overdampers?

[David Boyce]

Following from David's Chappell piano posts, I started wondering again
why there were so many overdamper action pianos produced in England.

As I said, they were generally the budget-end pianos in a maker's range;
parallel strung and overdamped. I wonder if the less efficient damping
of overdampers was a way of compensating for the lower power and poorer
tone of the parallel stringing, with the bass bridge at the edge of the
soundboard etc.

Or maybe less fitting of dampers to strings was needed with oerdamper
actions and some man-hours saved in manufacture.

Best regards,

David B.

[Joseph Garrett]

David,
The most apparent/compelling reason for the Over-Damper piano is not necessarily cheaper, but the perceived tonality. They sounded more like "grandmas piano" and less like a "modern piano". People of the period from around 1880's to the early 1900's had very definite thoughts about piano tone. It has been written in many books about the loud, bright tone being objectionable in the "modern piano".
The Over-Damper Piano was made, (as was the square grand), right side by side with modern style instruments in the same factory. Why else, but the sound of the inadequate damping system to mimic that of "grandma's piano"?<G> (Grandma's Piano was made in 1820 or so if you do the math.<G> During that period of piano making, damping was far from perfected as it is in the "modern piano".)
Best,
Joe


Captain of the Tool Police
Squares R I
gpianoworks.com

[David Boyce]

On 12/10/2016 17:07, Joseph Garrett wrote:

> David,
> The most apparent/compelling reason for the Over-Damper piano is not necessarily cheaper, but the perceived tonality. They sounded more like "grandmas piano" and less like a "modern piano". People of the period from around 1880's to the early 1900's had very definite thoughts about piano tone. It has been written in many books about the loud, bright tone being objectionable in the "modern piano".
> The Over-Damper Piano was made, (as was the square grand), right side by side with modern style instruments in the same factory. Why else, but the sound of the inadequate damping system to mimic that of "grandma's piano"?<G> (Grandma's Piano was made in 1820 or so if you do the math.<G> During that period of piano making, damping was far from perfected as it is in the "modern piano".)
> Best,
> Joe
> Captain of the Tool Police
> Squares R I
> gpianoworks.com

I don't think I quite buy this, Joe.

What books said the sound of overstrung overdamped pianos (presumably
the 'modern' ones) was objectionable? If the tone was all that
objectionable, why did the 'modern' pianos sell, and why were they the
more expensive ones in the range, with the parallel strung overdampers,
made side-by-side in the same factories, being the 'budget' pianos in
the makers' catalogues? (See for example the page of the Sames piano
catalogue on my Birdcage Pianos page
http://www.davidboyce.co.uk/birdcage-pianos.php

Best regards,

David B.

[Joseph Garrett]

David,
Below.

>I don't think I quite buy this, Joe.

Why not?

>
>What books said the sound of overstrung overdamped pianos (presumably
>the 'modern' ones) was objectionable?

I did not say modern overdamped pianos. I said modern, meaning standard damping in grands w/over stringing and uprights with under dampers.
I cannot, specifically say "what books", but I have read it in several over the years. One book that does come to mind is the one by Dolge.

If the tone was all that
>objectionable, why did the 'modern' pianos sell,

Because, like today where everyone has to have the newest, best technology on a daily basis. The times they were a changing. And there were the usual ones stuck in the sentimentality of the past. Nothing changes/Everything changes.<G>

and why were they the
>more expensive ones in the range, with the parallel strung overdampers,
>made side-by-side in the same factories, being the 'budget' pianos in
>the makers' catalogues? (See for example the page of the Sames piano
>catalogue on my Birdcage Pianos page

That I cannot tell you. I cannot see where the manufacturing cost would have been any different, except in the use of inferior wood that was used in the majority of overdamper pianos. Since you are closer to the "source", it might be easier for you to find out why.<G>
I'm just going on my personal experience with the over damper pianos. I have made it a "specialty" in my business to work on them and try to be as authentic as was perceived.
Best,
Joe

[David Boyce]

>> What books said the sound of overstrung overdamped pianos (presumably
>> the 'modern' ones) was objectionable?
> I did not say modern overdamped pianos. I said modern, meaning standard damping in grands w/over stringing and uprights with under dampers.
> I cannot, specifically say "what books", but I have read it in several over the years. One book that does come to mind is the one by Dolge.
>

Sorry, careless typing on my part! I meant to say "the sound of
overstrung UNDERdamped pianos (presumably the 'modern' ones)". I
should have checked more carefully what I wrote.

I've checked briefly through my copy of Dolge, and he has some
interesting thoughts in his "Conclusions", but I can't find anything
specific to the properties of 'birdcage' pianos as being tonally
preferred over overstrung underdamper pianos.

I think Bill Kibby of pianohistory.info might be the person to ask. He
said that Berry in England produced overdamper pianos right up until
1954. I suspect however that they may have been using pre world war two
stocks of overdamper actions - I doubt if the actions were made after
the war. But I could be wrong!

Best regards,

David B.

[Joseph Garrett]

David,
Whatever the cause/effect is/was, the Over-Damper Piano and the Square Grand are different animals than our "modern pianos". I hope that those of use that service them will realize the differences and preserve rather than try to "modernize" them. There are those who prefer the sound of an Over Damper piano. <G> Dolge did not, specifically talk about overdamper pianos. However, he lamented the loss of the older sound in regards to the new sound of pianos in general. He was dead set against the "baby grands". He thought they were a waste of materials. (as do I.<G>)
Best Regards,

Joe


Captain of the Tool Police
Squares R I
gpianoworks.com

-----Original Message-----
>From: David Boyce <Da...@piano.plus.com>

[David Boyce]

On 12/10/2016 19:33, Joseph Garrett wrote:

> David,
> Whatever the cause/effect is/was, the Over-Damper Piano and the Square Grand are different animals than our "modern pianos". I hope that those of use that service them will realize the differences and preserve rather than try to "modernize" them. There are those who prefer the sound of an Over Damper piano. <G> Dolge did not, specifically talk about overdamper pianos. However, he lamented the loss of the older sound in regards to the new sound of pianos in general. He was dead set against the "baby grands". He thought they were a waste of materials. (as do I.<G>)
> Best Regards,
> Joe
>
>
> Captain of the Tool Police
> Squares R I
> gpianoworks.com

Well indeed, "baby grands" are universally execrable. A lot of them here also had (up until 1967) the cut-down D Type Spring & Loop actions. John Bishop in the Haynes Piano Manual calls them "vanity pianos".

There are, of course, overdamper pianos and overdamper pianos. The huge old Bluthner overdamper pianos I used to see occasionally, were a different kettle of fish entirely from the little cheap English ones. And I do still find some overstrung birdcage pianos too (and underdamped straight strung, like the very nice old Bechstein Model 10s).

Best regards,

David B.

[Joseph Garrett]

Captain of the Tool Police
Squares R I
gpianoworks.com

-----Original Message-----
>From: David Boyce <Da...@piano.plus.com>
>Sent: Oct 12, 2016 11:49 AM
>To: pian...@googlegroups.com
>Subject: Re: [pianotech] Why overdampers?
>

David,
Agree on the variants. Most, (but not all), German overstrung overdamper pianos are quite nice. I own one.<G> Most, (even the icky ones), lend well to Victorian temperaments. That probably has to do the lower tension scales. But,...then again, the German ones had Medium tension to high tension scales as well. Hmmm? I like the difference, as I prefer to like an Artist choosing a piano for a specific kind of music/composer. That doesn't happen much anymore, but that had validity imo.
Best,
Joe

[Ron Nossaman]

On 10/12/2016 1:49 PM, David Boyce wrote:
>
>
> Well indeed, "baby grands" are universally execrable. A lot of them
> here also had (up until 1967) the cut-down D Type Spring & Loop
> actions. John Bishop in the Haynes Piano Manual calls them "vanity
> pianos".
>
> There are, of course, overdamper pianos and overdamper pianos. The huge
> old Bluthner overdamper pianos I used to see occasionally, were a
> different kettle of fish entirely from the little cheap English ones.
> And I do still find some overstrung birdcage pianos too (and underdamped
> straight strung, like the very nice old Bechstein Model 10s).

While it's possible for some things to be done well, anything at all can
be done badly, and too often is. Small grands can be made quite
acceptably musical. They just aren't through, as nearly as I can tell,
ignorance and adherence to "standard" practice and "knowledge". Large
grands could use a lot of rethinking too, in my opinion. When music
moved from the small venue to the concert stage, piano tone was left
behind in favor of volume. I hear from the old folks (fewer of whom
remain with each passing year) that they remember the clean full tone of
the pianos they played as kids, compared to the transistor radio at full
volume from a 2" speaker sound they hear now. All the time I've been in
the business, I've heard of the old upright, even the one sitting on the
back porch for years, with the "beautiful tone". So everyone wanted an
upright with the beautiful tone, and a fancy case, but no one wanted to
rebuild it so it would actually function (pianos don't age, you know),
and ended up with either an unplayable old beater or a nasty little
piano that clanged. This is largely what the market offers now, nasty
loud clangy pianos of all sizes, and isn't going to change because no
one has heard anything better for too many years.

People seem to know less and less about more and more all the time, and
get their opinions by averaging those of others rather than taking a
chance and thinking something through themselves. This is the way pianos
sound, so that must be how they are supposed to sound. The manufacturer
did it this way for a good reason. How many times have we read that on
the list(s) through the years? If it doesn't hurt, it lacks power, never
mind fundamental.
Ron N

[David Boyce]

Nice thoughts Ron. I wasn't thinking so much of SMALL grands, as REALLY
small grands, of which plenty are to be found here, barely four feet in
length. But I guess even they could have been made a lot better than
they were!

Moving from the domestic situation to the concert/recital stage, concert
pianist Stephen Hough, has a nice essay about the fall of Bechstein and
rise of S&S here:
http://www.stephenhough.com/writings/selective/berceuse-bechstein.php

Best regards,

David B.

[Ron Nossaman]

On 10/12/2016 3:54 PM, David Boyce wrote:
>
>
> Nice thoughts Ron. I wasn't thinking so much of SMALL grands, as REALLY
> small grands, of which plenty are to be found here, barely four feet in
> length. But I guess even they could have been made a lot better than
> they were!

Yes, they could. Many of the basic design problems were patented a
century ago and are still proudly trumpeted today as features. Tuned
front duplexes leaving too long and loud duplex segments that prompt all
sorts of heroic attempts at quieting the things by modifying the capo
when it's the duplex that's the problem. Killer octaves from underbuilt
and inadequately supported belly rails and diaphragmed compression
crowned soundboards. The notion of getting the longest bass string
possible in the case, resulting in short back scales that kill all hope
of fundamental in the bass. Huge core wires that finally kill whatever
fundamental that might be left. Few bass notes, forcing drastic
foreshortening of low tenor speaking lengths to get the long bridge to
go into the piano, bring us low tenors that quack like ducks and won't
stay in tune. There are lots more involving scaling, bridge placement,
panel compression, ribbing, bracing, soundboard area, and from which
side of which mountain the panel wood was cut.

The industry nearly quit thinking altogether a hundred years ago except
for a very few occasional limited efforts. The sound of the pianos
available shows this. There are limited efforts being made, which I hope
are successful so at least some of the public can hear what pianos are
capable of sounding like at their best, but most people won't get it
when they hear it anyway. No power. If it doesn't actually hurt to
listen to, it has no guts. Gotta be a warrior now, not a musician. If
the sound doesn't cause flakes of plaster to fall from the ceiling, it's
no good. I've tuned where ear plugs weren't enough, where the owner sat
and pounded the piano for hours a day.

> Moving from the domestic situation to the concert/recital stage, concert
> pianist Stephen Hough, has a nice essay about the fall of Bechstein and
> rise of S&S here:
> http://www.stephenhough.com/writings/selective/berceuse-bechstein.php

Good article. Sadly, hardly anyone seems to realize what has been lost.
Not just with Bechstein, but with a whole class of pianos. I remember
when the resurrected Mason & Hamlin A first showed up on the exhibition
floor of the convention. I was curious to see what they had, and plunked
around on it for a while. Noisy as the hall was, it sounded pretty good
to me. Strong low partial content. Good full tone, not loud and brash,
and had good balance across the scale. I liked it. A couple of years
later, I checked another one out and was very disappointed. Thin,
bright, shallow, and very like most everything else around it. I asked
the rep why they ruined such fine potential by making the thing so
bright. He said it was what people wanted. By eliminating the choice, I
suppose it proved true.
Ron N

[Tom Lewis]

Did you ever get an answer as to why "so many" overdamper pianos were built in London?

I am in the middle of Texas, but recently came across a Chappell & Co upright from 1886 that has this birdcage overdamper system (and straight strung, wooden pin board).

I've been very much pondering why in 1886 this design was still even being built.   Was it a cost-savings measure?  I see many advertisements where Chappell seems to try to keep their bottom end uprights in the 25-35 guinea range.  I've done some analysis on what that cost really means -- it's not pocket change, while at most it is 6 months salary (back in the 1880s); more likely it was about 2 months pay for a typical worker that might be inclined to buy a piano.  My estimate worked out to it being like spending about $3000 today on a piano -- ignoring the used market, you'd be getting quite a bottom end piano today for that money (but yet it would still be a useful instrument, for casual entertainment or just learning how to play on).

STILL - my focus is on WHY.  Chappell in particular, they had iron frame, oblique strings advertimsents even in the 1860s.  Why by mid-1880s be selling such an old design?

Your thought that, in contemporary times, there was a market for those who wanted the different tonal sound -- maybe

I found an old Chappell advertisement that mentions their lower end "London cottage piano" being suited for the "country".  (I can find the exact quoting if needed, but it goes on to elaborate about how tuners aren't as easily found out in the country, so it's a selling point -- and that does make good sense, travel wasn't easy then and if I'd like to be self sufficient on tuning, I might prefer a simpler design and less parts to go wrong)

I guess we'll never know.... maybe it was Chappell just trying to run inventory of old parts to run out.    My problem with the "some people liked that tone" angle is -- I don't see it on the advertisements.  no mention of "classic sound" style (but advertisement space was limited back then).

I was also thinking about the metals of the day -- were iron pin blocks all that good back then?  Were they prone to rust and making it very hard to service pins?  Where as with wood -- well, 133 years later I've tuned this piano.  And I mean in 1886, would they be stainless steel pin blocks yet?

-Steve

(apologies for resurrecting such an old thread)

[Joseph Garrett]

Steve,

I suspect you are not a piano technician. Reason? ALL pinblocks are made of wood! (with the exception of one or two idiot companies that tried to use the plate for such. Also, the screw stringer thang of M&H)

So, to answer your actuall question of "why?". There were many reasons. Even though there were more parts to Overdamper  upright pianos, they were cheaply made. I like to call them the Ghetto Blasters of the 19th Century.<G>

The pinblocks were simply butt jointed blocks of European Beech w/thin veneer on the front and a 3/4" backing board. Chappell, was one of hundreds of companies that made them right along side of modern piano designs being made in the same factory. The only logical reason, imho, is that of the sound. They were mimicking the sound of the "ancient" pianos. (my term, for lack of a better one.<G>) Each did not damp very well. The touch was "clunky" on each, as well. As for the availability of "tooners"? I think that was some misguided bit of marketing. During that period many people tuned their own pianos. (or rather attempted to.<G>)  I can't tell you how many goose neck tuning hammers I've collected out of the insides of said pianos.

The French Overdamper pianos were fewer and worse than the English, even though they were more ornate. The Germans, actually made overstung versions. Those were formidable instruments imo. I own one, that has been nicely restored. I like to have technicians play it before telling them it's an overdamper, overstrung piano. Almost all technicians cannot tell me what kind of action it has, even after ripping off a bit of Chopin or such.

I could go on and on about the differences and similarities, but won't.

Best,

Joe

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pianotech" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to pianotech+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pianotech/f37d37bd-625d-4834-af3f-02c28da62cbe%40googlegroups.com.

[Joseph Garrett]

Steve? Tom? (Not sure who was the original poster)

Even though you are "in the middle of Texas, (the second largest state in the union<G> I'm from the 1st.), you probably have an ambitious "Antique Dealer" that has imported that lovely instrument in yoiur area. Along with a whole bunch of other overdamper pianos and lots of English furniture.

[Tom Lewis]

Thanks for the comments!!

I'm not a technician, you're right :)  I missed the point that the modern pianos have an iron plate in front of the pin block.  When viewing videos of other antique pianos, I only ever saw the iron plate; I forgot the pins are quite deep and would be set into wood behind the plate (but what is the point of the iron plate?  Which the Chappell I have is lacking -- so I should say, it doesn't have an iron pin plate?)


I'm still trying to determine if this is actually a "pianino" -- Chappell advertisements state their "foreign pianino" upright at 3ft 4inches, but I measure this Chappell at 44 inches exact (3ft 6inch), which seems to be a tad smaller than most uprights (most being above 4ft height, it seems).   Or are uprights possibly not measured based on the actual exterior cabinet height?


The Germans are said to have made "good quality" overdamper designs (just based on a few articles I've read) -- would they desire the "ancient piano" sound as well, like the English?  I thought perhaps somehow a higher pitch was preferred by the English (I say this only because I found a note about Chappell using A4 of 454Hz instead of 440Hz -- but without much context, it's hard to say what they really meant). 

It's still very curious to me how, evidentally like you said, both types of pianos are produced at the same time (by the same manufacturer) -- I found an 1884 Chappell advertisement (2 years from the date on this pianos serial number) emphasizing iron frame and oblique strings, so it's not like they didn't know how to make such pianos.  And in that advertisement, they're also 30-35 guinea.   Another possibility is they also offered "student pianos" for like 5-20 guinea, so that's substantially cheaper (say normally 15 guinea, so that's half price of 30).  But so far I haven't seen any of these student pianos offered with a full 7 octaves (per the advertisements).   The full advertisement description is:

"Chappell's English Model Cottage pianoforte - To amateurs preferring the pure English tone of the Broadwood and Collard quality, the English Model will be found the most perfectly satisfactory instrument at a modest price.  The action is of the same simple description as the above makers', and therefore especially adapted to the country, where the more complicated actions are objectionable to the tuners.  In elegant rosewood case, with full fret, similar in all respects to other instruments at 50 guineas, price 35 guineas; in best walnut (similar to other 60-guinea instruments), 40 guineas."

And as far as the "middle of Texas" -- a couple people have mentioned to me how there was a fairly big migration of these kinds of pianos across the pond in the 1970s (initially I think thru Canada).  It does make sense -- space is perhaps more limited on an island like the U.K.  To clear out warehouses, why not ship this old inventory to the States? (better than burning)


I'm not a technician, but we did get this piano for free - since it was about to be trashed, I decided to just go ahead and experiment with it.  I can't play piano, but my daughter does.  

I spent a few weekends getting the keys level and playable again, and used an iPhone app to adjust the tune frequencies for the first 4 octaves (back to A4 of 440).  The trichords are a pain -- I got a couple of them tuned so far, but I found the iPhone app I use doesn't do well at reporting above 2100 Hz anyway.   As for the dampening, I found that you just need to push the "hammer rack" back a little more (the original latches are a bit sagged, just inserting a few index cards is enough to add a little pressure to the dampening felts - some keys are still not properly damped, and for those, I can just slightly bend the hanger that the damper is on).

When we first got it, my daughter couldn't play anything recognizable (severely inconsistent tune).  Here are a couple samples of what it sounds like so far.... To me, the action seems pretty responsive (the design on this Chapell has some kind of ribbons to pull the hammers back, so I don't think it's that spring and loop design? although there is a string in there, so idk...).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyOELJVFt-A
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6Nk_1Qr4Zg

It's still a little rough, but opinions welcomed.  This is the first acoustic piano that I've ever looked at inside.  I'm just glad the strings didn't snap and she got a chance to play a little.   I'm not sure how to voice the hammers (and from what I've read, I may just not even bother -- although one of the hammers is broken; only one).  

-Steve    (or Tom, middle name)

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pianotech/1815691405.6538.1574707320822%40wamui-quail.atl.sa.earthlink.net.

[Joseph Garrett]

Tom,

See below.

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Lewis

Sent: Nov 25, 2019 10:10 PM
To: pian...@googlegroups.com

Subject: Re: [pianotech] Re: Why overdampers?

Thanks for the comments!!

I'm not a technician, you're right :)  I missed the point that the modern pianos have an iron plate in front of the pin block.  When viewing videos of other antique pianos, I only ever saw the iron plate; I forgot the pins are quite deep and would be set into wood behind the plate (but what is the point of the iron plate?  Which the Chappell I have is lacking -- so I should say, it doesn't have an iron pin plate?)

That Chappell has metal struts that help hold the tension. The struts are hidden in the structure. Where did the term "pin plate" come from? It's simply a Plate or some call it The Harp". It is the Spine of the instrument. w/o it the piano would fold up and die. DAMHIK. <G>

I'm still trying to determine if this is actually a "pianino" -- Chappell advertisements state their "foreign pianino" upright at 3ft 4inches, but I measure this Chappell at 44 inches exact (3ft 6inch), which seems to be a tad smaller than most uprights (most being above 4ft height, it seems).   Or are uprights possibly not measured based on the actual exterior cabinet height?

The size of your PIANO is that of the European Cottage Piano. It is a cheap knock off of the better English made instruments. If you had done some research into piano sizes you would know that 36" to 40" is a spinet piano. 40" to 45" is a console. 45" to 49" is a Studio. Above 49" is a Full Upright, sometimes referred, (by the manufacturer), as an "Upright Grand". That is a total marketing line of B.S. however, as there is no "Grand" involved in uprights. <G> The manufacturer was simply telling the public that the string length was similar to a Grand Piano. Sigh!

The Germans are said to have made "good quality" overdamper designs (just based on a few articles I've read) -- would they desire the "ancient piano" sound as well, like the English?  I thought perhaps somehow a higher pitch was preferred by the English (I say this only because I found a note about Chappell using A4 of 454Hz instead of 440Hz -- but without much context, it's hard to say what they really meant).

Can you say: Marketing B.S.?<G>

It's still very curious to me how, evidentally like you said, both types of pianos are produced at the same time (by the same manufacturer) -- I found an 1884 Chappell advertisement (2 years from the date on this pianos serial number) emphasizing iron frame and oblique strings, so it's not like they didn't know how to make such pianos.  And in that advertisement, they're also 30-35 guinea.   Another possibility is they also offered "student pianos" for like 5-20 guinea, so that's substantially cheaper (say normally 15 guinea, so that's half price of 30).  But so far I haven't seen any of these student pianos offered with a full 7 octaves (per the advertisements).   The full advertisement description is:

"Chappell's English Model Cottage pianoforte - To amateurs preferring the pure English tone of the Broadwood and Collard quality, the English Model will be found the most perfectly satisfactory instrument at a modest price.  The action is of the same simple description as the above makers', and therefore especially adapted to the country, where the more complicated actions are objectionable to the tuners.  In elegant rosewood case, with full fret, similar in all respects to other instruments at 50 guineas, price 35 guineas; in best walnut (similar to other 60-guinea instruments), 40 guineas."

More marketing B.S.

And as far as the "middle of Texas" -- a couple people have mentioned to me how there was a fairly big migration of these kinds of pianos across the pond in the 1970s (initially I think thru Canada).  It does make sense -- space is perhaps more limited on an island like the U.K.  To clear out warehouses, why not ship this old inventory to the States? (better than burning)

In the 70's and into the 80's the "migration" of overdamper pianos was the cash cow for "antique dealers" of all ilk. That is how I became involved in them. Most were crap. A few were decent.

I'm not a technician, but we did get this piano for free - since it was about to be trashed, I decided to just go ahead and experiment with it.  I can't play piano, but my daughter does. 

I would strongly suggest you hire a competent piano tuner to help you in this endeavor. Pianos are not DIY projects! Sigh!

I spent a few weekends getting the keys level and playable again, and used an iPhone app to adjust the tune frequencies for the first 4 octaves (back to A4 of 440).  The trichords are a pain -- I got a couple of them tuned so far, but I found the iPhone app I use doesn't do well at reporting above 2100 Hz anyway.   As for the dampening, I found that you just need to push the "hammer rack" back a little more (the original latches are a bit sagged, just inserting a few index cards is enough to add a little pressure to the dampening felts - some keys are still not properly damped, and for those, I can just slightly bend the hanger that the damper is on).

Ah yes! You have fallen into the trap that most piano technicians do. The piano is NOT meant to "dampen" like modern pianos! Do Not try to accomplish that, as it is physically impossible and it opens up a huge can of worms. However, it is your property, so do with it as you wish.<G>

When we first got it, my daughter couldn't play anything recognizable (severely inconsistent tune).  Here are a couple samples of what it sounds like so far.... To me, the action seems pretty responsive (the design on this Chapell has some kind of ribbons to pull the hammers back, so I don't think it's that spring and loop design? although there is a string in there, so idk...).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyOELJVFt-A
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6Nk_1Qr4Zg

It's still a little rough, but opinions welcomed.  This is the first acoustic piano that I've ever looked at inside.  I'm just glad the strings didn't snap and she got a chance to play a little.   I'm not sure how to voice the hammers (and from what I've read, I may just not even bother -- although one of the hammers is broken; only one). 

Again, hire a competent piano tuner for assistance. If you find that you like working on pianos, then join PTG and get involved with a mentor. That is how many have become good piano tuners.<G>

Best,

Joe

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pianotech/CAJtpTxxgJVw8aBNNFhDnvgE66wcUziAxhJexh%3DFY9r9yLngr-w%40mail.gmail.com.

[Tom Lewis]

I see, even though it does say London on the key cover, it is possible it was actually built in France (Chappell was known to have other "factories" there at some point in time).

But it has no iron frame on this particular piano.  The only iron is at the very bottom for the string hitches.    FWIW, it is also straight strung (I'm not sure if that requires less tension than the oblique/diagonal modern string arrangement).   I have some photos here:    http://s488.photobucket.com/user/salewis578/library/2019_10_04_Chapell_1886_Piano 

At the link below, it mentions the "iron plate" above the pin block.  But like you said, that is usually integrated as part of the frame itself (The Harp).   

https://www.pianotuningphoenix.com/Repair-PDFs/A-07a.10007-CA-Pblock.pdf  

I've seen the really old spinets (small little triangular pianos), but never came across any formal definition of the heights.   Mostly I just went by Bill Kirby's site, where it is simply "semi-cottage" for the shorter cottage pianos:

http://www.pianohistory.info/victorian.html   

I suppose I may actually have the spring and loop action.  I've tried contacting a few technicians, but no response -- either they're really busy, or they don't have the heart to tell me that it's a dead piano (formal restoration shops have quoted $15k, but we're in no position for that)    I see what you and others are trying to tell me:  it's more of a clacky wooden puppet than a piano! :)    

Thanks again!

Steve

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pianotech/1141971742.3271.1574785795332%40wamui-abby.atl.sa.earthlink.net.

[Joseph Garrett]

Tom/Steve,

Paragraph one: NO!

Your picture app really sucks.

It appears to be o.k. and possibly tuneable, BUT, you need to HIRE A TECH.

Joe

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pianotech/CAJtpTxztpqGDq5kg2rD7v%3DAbeZk8Y3JMszQ7bL3CoxizhCg%3DbQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Tom Lewis]

Yes, I've just about given up on photobucket.  Sorry about that, I noticed today the ads were ridiculous.  

An alternative is here at box.com :

https://app.box.com/folder/89283436928

Or attached are a few photos to concentrate on the inner parts.

I'll keep looking around for a tuner in the DFW area.  I agree it's a bottom end model, but since it has held a tune for more than a few days now, I hate to call it junk just yet :)

-Steve

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pianotech/256557962.6815.1574804524127%40wamui-abby.atl.sa.earthlink.net.

[Joseph Garrett]

Tom,

The attatchments were just fine. The "alternative" is another sucky imo.<G> The serial dates it as 1886, but the action and general design is archaic for that period. Either this company was way behind the times or it is one of their cheap models. Oval tuning pins were pretty much gone by that time. And yet, there they are in all their, (groan), glory.<G>

You'll need to find a tuner with matching equipment. No, I won't go to Texas!

Best,

Joe

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pianotech/CAJtpTxyZSR7ALHBYZecaG7LSD3XGt_g5%2BGDCUjvzkEPE7GgbcQ%40mail.gmail.com.