Piano rim: Is its material part of piano sound making?
Piano Fan
I'm told that the piano rim is solely used to support the soundboard for
sound production. There is a lot of string tension so it has to be very
strong, while being dense to keep the sound lingering by reflecting it
back to, at least, the soundboard.
Currently, hardwoods are used for the rim. But, why not substitute this
material with anything man made that is just as dense and strong, since
its just a passive frame and reflector of sound? While the outer veneers
can be decorative of any type of wood, the hard core strength still comes
from these hardwoods.
There are curious acrylic pianos from Schimmel and custom ones from Kawai
that I've never heard.
Why not make the case of the strongest man-made dense material, like some
metal alloy or plastic, then simply laminate it with veneers to make a
nice finish, if desired? It would save trees at least. It may lower
production cost and produce greater sound from a piano given the
possibilities of greater strength of the rim, and potential for greater
string tension.
Just looking for comments from the RPT folks herein.
Thanks.
JJ
Tom Shaw
technology relating to optimization of sound.
In a word they stink
TS
"Piano Fan" <P...@AOL.com> wrote in message
news:Xns978058098...@199.45.49.11...
Citizen
for rims so that the rims are also actively involved in sound
production.
Piano Fan
this newsgroup available, so I googled it and got the answer. FYI this
is what they said:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.music.makers.piano/browse_frm/thread/c
024c90974bc4a76/5612d2104a23738f?q=piano+rim&rnum=24#5612d2104a23738f
It isn't as simple as selecting the hardness of the wood, anyway. It is
the combination of gluing methods (thickness of wood, # of laminations),
total thickness of rim, together with the relative hardness of the wood
used which creates the proper impedance for the desired reflectivity of
the rim.
Rims and plates both vibrate, and contribute to the tone of the
instrument.
By the way, I remember reading about an American company in the late 19th
century making rims of concrete. Maybe Rick can dig up the info.
Don Mannino RPT
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.music.makers.piano/tree/browse_frm/thr
ead/c024c90974bc4a76/c69c42df12fb1528?rnum=11&q=metal+rim&_done=%2Fgroup%
2Frec.music.makers.piano%2Fbrowse_frm%2Fthread%2Fc024c90974bc4a76%
2F84f0847cb79faf53%3Fq%3Dmetal+rim%26rnum%3D2%26#doc_a7b95bd5631f168c
Making a rim "acoustically dead" isn't exactly the goal. Bosendorfer rims
"soak" energy into them and become an active part of the
amplification/sustain/decay process, while everyone else making a premium
piano makes the rim as hard as possible, not only for structural
integrity, but to "reflect" energy as much as possible back into the
soundboard. These rims aren't acoustically "dead" they are reflective. So
*all* cases are acoustically alive, there is just a difference in how the
Bosendorfer uses the energy. Cases will contribute to the sound of the
piano either by "soaking" energy and becoming an "extension" of the sound
board, or by acting like the rim of a drum and reflecting the energy back
- either way contributes. It is the Asian rims, which try to reflect
energy but do so with soft wood, where the issue becomes clouded.
Larry Fletcher
Pianos, Inc.
Atlanta, GA
Dealer/Technician
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.music.makers.piano/browse_frm/thread/5
98211d53b336760/666968587d291ad6?q=piano+rim&rnum=1#666968587d291ad6
Pianos such as Steinway, Baldwin, Walter, etc. use hard maple in their
rims. It is one of the functions of the piano rim to provide not just
structural support to the piano soundboard, but acoustical support as
well.
Regards,
Del
Delwin D Fandrich
Piano Designer & Builder
Hoquiam, Washington USA
Cy Shuster
of glass, and you can tell the difference in tone:
http://www.stemco.nl/
Unfortunately, the piano industry is very conservative when it comes to the
use of materials. Tradition counts a lot. What other product manufacturer
brags that they still make their product the same way as 100 years ago?
Another issue is, what problem are you trying to solve by replacing wood in
the rim with another material? Saving trees would be one benefit, but there
are downsides to steel and plastics in terms of environmental concerns. New
problems are created by trying to bond dissimilar materials. And different
materials give different results: the spruce rims of Boesendorfer et. al.
give a different sound than Steinway and Mason & Hamlin with hardwood rims.
(Variety is good).
Kawai is one company that is advancing the state-of-the-art with materials
science, by replacing wood with composites where the greatest benefit is
achieved:
http://www.kawaius.com/mIII.html
It would be interesting to hear a soundboard made from a carbon fiber
composite. The very best straight-grain spruce is being used up, just to
make solid, blemish-free soundboards.
--Cy--
John Peterson
news:UrCdnQgdGuf...@comcast.com:
> There have been many experiments with materials. Here's a soundboard
> made of glass, and you can tell the difference in tone:
> http://www.stemco.nl/
Thanks, Cy! A nice lead. Will check it out. I've heard only of: an iron
case piano, one of concrete and the most well know being the Schimmel and
Kawai acrylic pianos ... but all only as mentions, I've not played the
actual instrument.
>
> Unfortunately, the piano industry is very conservative when it comes
> to the use of materials. Tradition counts a lot. What other product
> manufacturer brags that they still make their product the same way as
> 100 years ago?
>
I'm sure its not done to brag, but to produce a product that continues to
sound, whatever signature sound that is, close to the same way. If Larry
Fine's book be right, some companies have been burned when substitutions
were made to non-wood parts such as bushings, affecting entire production
runs.
> Another issue is, what problem are you trying to solve by replacing
> wood in the rim with another material? Saving trees would be one
> benefit,
And the cost of such woods, mainly, while maintaining the acoustic
integrity of wood. Per Steinway, the wood is one of the highest principle
costs of the piano, not just due to scarcity, but it resists automated
construction methods.
but there are downsides to steel and plastics in terms of
> environmental concerns. New problems are created by trying to bond
> dissimilar materials.
Personally, I know not, but bonding science is probably a solvable issue in
the 21st Century. There is the potential for a metal alloy, which often can
be recycled. Nevertheless, the quest for the lower cost instrument has
driven innovation.
And different materials give different results:
> the spruce rims of Boesendorfer et. al. give a different sound than
> Steinway and Mason & Hamlin with hardwood rims. (Variety is good).
>
Yes, agree fully. I guess it comes down to if the material can be
substituted without a negatory effect on a sound. As you said, there may
not be a single preferred sound. Asian pianos are a class on their own but
not acceptable for classical music or much solo piano music to be frank,
compared to the reputations of the top European and US pianos.
> Kawai is one company that is advancing the state-of-the-art with
> materials science, by replacing wood with composites where the
> greatest benefit is achieved:
> http://www.kawaius.com/mIII.html
>
Thanks again for the lead. Alas, as I've heard it the sound still does not
approximate that of the pianos preferred in classical music.
> It would be interesting to hear a soundboard made from a carbon fiber
> composite. The very best straight-grain spruce is being used up, just
> to make solid, blemish-free soundboards.
>
This is again my concern. If the trend continues material to make quality
pianos will increasing become scarce or unsuitable compared to the past, so
the rebuilt older pianos becomes the precious remnants of the past, just
like the industry in finding old logs underwater has now become
economically possible and marketable.
JJ
Tom Shaw
manufacture. If you want a different sound then I am sure the electronic
synthesizers of the future will serve your desires better. If you are an
environmentalist worrying about the use of trees I guess you might consider
that the use of choice wood in musical instruments is a drop in the bucket
compared to the devastation of the world's forests accruing to
agricultural and utility development in the third world.
Making musical instruments is an art. Technology normally can only advance
the production of items that have no art involved such as automobiles, TV
sets, refrigerators, etc. etc.
TS
PS I realize that styling in the production of consumer goods is an artistic
endeavor, for the most part, but the major emphasis is on utilility.
"Cy Shuster" <c...@example.com> wrote in message
news:UrCdnQgdGuf...@comcast.com...
Cy Shuster
"John Peterson" <j...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:Xns97814CB81...@199.45.49.11...
>> Kawai is one company that is advancing the state-of-the-art with
>> materials science, by replacing wood with composites where the
>> greatest benefit is achieved:
>> http://www.kawaius.com/mIII.html
>>
>
> Thanks again for the lead. Alas, as I've heard it the sound still does
> not
> approximate that of the pianos preferred in classical music.
Kawai gave musicians in a classical music competition the choice of
different pianos, and they chose this one consistently. Since the
improvements are in the mechanical parts, not the ones directly connected
with tone (hammershanks, etc.), the sound is unchanged, but the inertia of
the action is reduced, improving control, repetition speed, and power (not
to mention reliability in changing humidity).
Try one, and decide for yourself. Having replaced and reglued many broken
wooden action parts, I'm a big fan.
--Cy--
P.S. Seen any wooden motorcycle helmets lately?
Piano Fan
> different pianos, and they chose this one consistently. Since the
> improvements are in the mechanical parts, not the ones directly
> connected with tone (hammershanks, etc.), the sound is unchanged, but
> the inertia of the action is reduced, improving control, repetition
> speed, and power (not to mention reliability in changing humidity).
>
> Try one, and decide for yourself. Having replaced and reglued many
> broken wooden action parts, I'm a big fan.
>
I will certainly try it. Thanks for the links, again. I tried some form
of action in the past from a Kawai, but I'm not sure its the same as
you've linked.
> P.S. Seen any wooden motorcycle helmets lately?
>
None, but I can't play Rachmaninov on it either ;) Its built with modern
materials given requirements: strength, comfort, ergonomics and weight,
say looking at kevlar verus traditional steel helmets.
Pianos are given requirements too, sonic over appearance, and if modern
materials can meet these demands for lower or equal cost, it seems like
it will happen, and why not?
Joe John
I revisited this topic as I was looking mostly for links to see what
folks have tried to do, to further improve piano acoustics and whether
the expensive and massive frame was part of such experimentation. There
are many websites discussing piano acoustic studies.
http://www.speech.kth.se/music/5_lectures/contents.html
There are similar attempts to capture the sound of a Stradivarius or
other wood based instruments using modern non-wood materials. These
studies are well documented in scientific acoustic journals, but there
isn't much I could find on the piano.
As you say, methinks the use of choice woods for non-musical purposes far
outstrips its use in musical instruments, and leading to their
endangerment. As such woods become scare, the instruments they are made
off too, become thus endangered.
I wondered if 'choice' woods found today is not in same quality as it was
when it was plentiful, and piano makers of the pre-1920s had their select
choice among "choice" woods, rather than simply having access to any
choice woods, as we in the modern world are increasing faced.
By experience, I've noticed many rebuilt old high quality grand pianos
have a very rich sound compared to newer pianos of the same line, this
despite after a complete rebuild by craftsmen using many modern
replacement parts for all but the rim. Thus, my inquiry about the piano
rim materials.
"Tom Shaw" <tsh...@comcast.net> wrote in
news:yMmdnSjniZt...@comcast.com:
Tom Shaw
My understand concerning woods is that in the Nordic countries trees are
grown specifically for musical instruments and (probably) fine furniture as
well. Also I understand that futures are sold for the "crops" on the stock
market similarly to commodity futures in the US. Accordingly I do not think
that we are in danger of running out of wood for musical instruments.
IMO there is more bs in the area of musical instrument quality than anything
short of the pictorial arts.
Subjectivity is a marvelous thing. I believe that tests have shown that
expert listeners cannot tell the difference between a first class Strad and
a first class violin made today. This demonstration led to the declaration
that even if you couldn't hear the difference the player found the Strad
easier to draw a tone from etc. etc. Needless to say the players have, at
the moment, science by the cojones on that since the scientific folks
haven't figured out how to measure ease of playing. You must remember that
the player has, in addition to his sentimental attachment to his instrument,
a very large financial investment. Accordingly it might affect his
investment badly if he were to say that a $10,000 example of a first rate
violin maker today was just as good as his $1,000,000 Strad.
I believe that wooden instruments, from the standpoint of tone, are where
you find them. You can get maximum craftsmanship for money but you cannot
buy tone. The craftsman cannot guarantee tone. As you know there are more
Strads lying around sounding like junk than great ones.
Your observation about the rich tone of rebuilt pianos is interesting
because, in view of my comments above, I would not expect a piano completely
rebuilt except for the rim to be necessarily as good as it was originally.
In fact I would expect it to be whatever tonal quality was possible using
the materials of the rebuild.
The whole thing is very subjective. Professional pianists are often allowed
to select from a group as they tour from city to city and I am fairly sure
that they dont all select the same piano. And one of them shipped his piano
to Russia and took his tuner along with him for a concert.
As I said you might expect to improve the engineering of the piano in terms
of reliability and touch but I dont think you can expect to improve tone by
means of material selection. That part is a crap shoot.
TS
"Joe John" <Justpo...@TAE.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9781CD40E5...@199.45.49.11...
Tom Shaw
selling of musical instruments.
I would certainly not expect everybody to agree on, say, the Ovation
guitars. I dont know if everybody agrees on anything in that respect.
TS
"John Rethorst" <nob...@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:nobody-F27895....@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
> In article <g_udnUt5BuaUrJLZ...@comcast.com>,
> "Tom Shaw" <tsh...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> Well Ovation has applied your idea to acoustic guitars including a lot of
>> technology relating to optimization of sound.
>> In a word they stink
>
> Not everyone thinks so, although they aren't my choice. Also note Rainsong
> guitars, IIRC made entirely out of artificial material. I haven't heard
> one.
>
> --
> John Rethorst
> jrethorst at post dot com
Tom Shaw
Quite a few acoustic guitars are sometimes made with cedar instead of spruce
tops. It is opined that the cedar ones hold their tone longer as the
instrument ages. It is also opined that guitars lose their tone with age
compared to violins. Who knows in view of the subectivity of the whole
issue?news:nobody-50BB63....@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
>> the spruce rims of Boesendorfer et. al. give a different sound than
>> Steinway and Mason & Hamlin with hardwood rims. (Variety is good).
>
>
> Anyone know what Fazioli uses?
Cy Shuster
There are some people who have applied engineering and material science to
soundboards. Del Fandrich, for one:
http://pianobuilders.com/soundboards.html
Of course, this is more than "material selection"; but you can't make a
soundboard out of any species of wood, and still have it sound like a piano.
--Cy--
"Tom Shaw" <tsh...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:lJmdnQv5_eFJaYzZ...@comcast.com...
Ben Bradley
wrote:
>It would be interesting to hear a soundboard made from a carbon fiber
>composite. The very best straight-grain spruce is being used up, just to
>make solid, blemish-free soundboards.
There's this carbon-fiber soundboard example on a guitar:
http://www.cumpiano.com/Home/Guitars/Special/Graphite/graphite.html
>--Cy--
>
>
Piano Fan
engage in a productive exchange.
"Tom Shaw" <tsh...@comcast.net> wrote in
news:lJmdnQv5_eFJaYzZ...@comcast.com:
> My understand concerning woods is that in the Nordic countries trees
> are grown specifically for musical instruments and (probably) fine
> furniture as well. Also I understand that futures are sold for the
> "crops" on the stock market similarly to commodity futures in the US.
> Accordingly I do not think that we are in danger of running out of
> wood for musical instruments.
>
Thanks for that lead, I will check it out.
I hope you are right, at least for the sake of musical instruments!
> IMO there is more bs in the area of musical instrument quality than
> anything short of the pictorial arts.
> Subjectivity is a marvelous thing. I believe that tests have shown
> that expert listeners cannot tell the difference between a first class
> Strad and a first class violin made today.
This demonstration led to
> the declaration that even if you couldn't hear the difference the
> player found the Strad easier to draw a tone from etc. etc. Needless
> to say the players have, at the moment, science by the cojones on that
> since the scientific folks haven't figured out how to measure ease of
> playing. You must remember that the player has, in addition to his
> sentimental attachment to his instrument, a very large financial
> investment. Accordingly it might affect his investment badly if he
> were to say that a $10,000 example of a first rate violin maker today
> was just as good as his $1,000,000 Strad.
>
Thanks. Found the link on the Peter Greiner violin vs Strads:
http://translate.google.com/translate?
hl=en&sl=de&u=http://www.greinergeigen.de/htm/presse_c_e.htm&prev=/search
%3Fq%3Dstradivarius%2Bmyth%26start%3D30%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26safe%3Doff%
26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26sa%3DN%26pwst%
3D1
> I believe that wooden instruments, from the standpoint of tone, are
> where you find them. You can get maximum craftsmanship for money but
> you cannot buy tone. The craftsman cannot guarantee tone. As you
> know there are more Strads lying around sounding like junk than great
> ones.
>
In the piano, I agree with you fully.
I would not know about Strads. But there are many links in the German
pages listed above that raise the controversy as this page does:
http://www.fritz-reuter.com/reports/rin048.htm
> Your observation about the rich tone of rebuilt pianos is interesting
> because, in view of my comments above, I would not expect a piano
> completely rebuilt except for the rim to be necessarily as good as it
> was originally. In fact I would expect it to be whatever tonal quality
> was possible using the materials of the rebuild.
>
I agree 100%. The issue was as I played old instruments, I ran into more
by number that were sonorously rich and satisfying than I did newer ones,
and that even with many pianos at Steinway Hall and other Steinway
dealers. Old pianos had at least new soundboard, strings, hammers and
finish ... most old pianos new keyboards too. Of course, there are dogs
in rebuilds, and I've played them.
So was it the rim's 'older' wood that made the sound, since the piano was
essentially gutted except for the rim and the iron frame?
> The whole thing is very subjective. Professional pianists are often
> allowed to select from a group as they tour from city to city and I am
> fairly sure that they dont all select the same piano. And one of them
> shipped his piano to Russia and took his tuner along with him for a
> concert.
>
That likely was Vladimir Horowitz.
> As I said you might expect to improve the engineering of the piano in
> terms of reliability and touch but I dont think you can expect to
> improve tone by means of material selection. That part is a crap
> shoot.
>
But this discussion made me think of another possibility beyond older
wood have something that made them sound better: these sonorous rebuilt
pianos I played were, if as you say tone is good purely by chance, highly
preselected. Rebuilders choose only worthy old pianos from among a
palette of possibilities so bad ones are not rebuilt, so rebuilds may
sound better because rebuilders have the luxury of rejecting less
qualified pianos. Factories building new pianos cannot rejected pianos
coming off production that doesn't sound up to higher standards.
Finally, it might be a bit of both.
Tom Shaw
problem is that when you make it out of the best wood you can conceive of it
is a crap shoot. Another interesting facet of this matter is that the
pianist has relatively a lot less control over his tone than any other
instrument besides percussions. A good musician can get a good sound out of
almost anything, including a piano, compared to an amateur.
Since there is no way to judge Fandrich or anybody else in this matter
except subjectively what else is there to say? If Fandrich can build
soundboards which alle have the same beautiful tone I'll eat my hat, as my
father used to say. He cant do it altho I am fairly sure his soundboard
will sound like a piano when installed.
That is, however, no big deal.
TS
"Cy Shuster" <c...@example.com> wrote in message
news:l5CdnRd2itftu4_Z...@comcast.com...
Tom Shaw
TS
"Piano Fan" <P...@AOL.com> wrote in message