Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Tuner-Technicians Forum Lester spinet buzz eradication project and pinblock health

After reading the recaps of the recent PTG convention, I have to admit, I am jealous! I need to pick up the pace, here, because I feel like I'm being left behind!

So, this post has to do with a buzz eradication question. This spring, my 1940 Lester spinet developed a bad intermittent buzz that would come and go with changes in humidity. I had just fixed a bunch of cracks in the soundboard, so that wasn't it. After a lot more looking around, I tracked it down to the case board that caps the pinblock.





A little bit of tapping up and down the board revealed hollow ticky-tap sounds that meant the board was coming undone. In fact, you can see in the picture, above, the varnish dust where the pin block cap meets the side board. I PM'd some of you, who suggested 1) shimming it (which I did for a while, and which worked for a time), 2) tipping the piano on it's back and pouring super glue between the board and the pinblock, or 3) removing the board and regluing it. As the buzz got worse, I even called a local piano rebuilder to see what he would do, and he when he looked at it, he suggested tipping it on it's back and pouring super glue in there.

After considering that approach carefully, I decided against it. I wanted to see what was going on in there--if there was anything else amiss. And I wasn't convinced that pouring thin or medium super glue would get everywhere it needed to go--or even that super glue was the best choice of glue... And the hiss-hahw buzz was getting consistently worse and driving me crazy!!! So, after talking it over with Bill earlier this week (who confirmed my squeamishness about just pouring glue in there), today I gritted my teeth, got out one of my putty knives, and carefully pried that board off the pinblock.



From the old glue marks, I could see where the board was coming undone and buzzing, and that a little sanding, some cold hide glue (yes?) and some decent bar clamps will put me back in business (I think...yes? anyone?).

But, there were a few things I wondered about.

1) Worm holes. What do you think? Are these from the wood that was originally used for the piano? Or was my piano infested at some point?







2) And is this a bark space or a bug nest?





Here's the same divit (L), not so close up, for reference:





3) And would these splits from where the back of the case is screwed on be causing any random buzzing sounds? Should I dig them out, tack them down, or leave them alone?









4) And is the split (lower R) anything to worry about? Pour a little super glue in there?



And, do you see anything else I need to be concerned about?

I welcome all advice from all corners! I'm hoping to have this little project wrapped up before Bill comes to tune it in a few weeks, so I can post a few recordings to the Unsung Heroes E-cital in Pianist Corner. Thanks, everybody!

--Andy Strong

You wouldn't want to just fill the gap(s) with glue...the problem when a block starts to seperate on any upright piano is solved by making a careful determination as to structural issues, and dropping tension somewhat and carefully (did I say carefully?) removing one plate bolt, drilling all the way through, and replacing with a well chosen carriage or similar bolt...then, rinse and repeat throughout until you have most or all of the original plate/block screws replaced with these clamp-kits...and then slowly beginning the long task of slowly bringing back together the block. IF (IF IF IF) you do this correctly, you will be rewarded with a very stable pin block and a nicely repaired piano.

I've done this lots of times...we charge several hundred dollars to do this repair which generally rules out certain instruments without much value. On the other hand, I gave an estimate a few days ago on a 1970's Everett piano which will be a nice repair if the client opts to do the repair.

I would never fill the gap, therefore, with anything PRIOR to pulling it together, and actually, getting the gap to close in time for glue to dry is iffy...we've normally had pretty good luck just clamping it all together again this way.

Of note: some early uprights came from the factory with this bolt system all the way through, and I've never found one that failed in this region when built this way. Too bad that every upright manufactured didn't just overbuild that area..oh well..

Hope some of that helps. Once you pull the thing together, you'll need a few passes to get it to settle down on pitch, but after that it should be solid as a rock.

(edited-I can't tell for certain from your pics if, in fact, the block is seperating...if buzzing is your concern, it might be something else...but if you feel the cracks are more than superficial, then my answer might be of use)

(second edit-also, when selecting your clamping bolts, make sure you don't pick something that in tightening will cause your cast iron to crack, i.e this will require a careful eye and some design to make a good repair...also, I have very little faith in bar clamps and hide glue...others may weigh in, but I'm in the drill it through and clamp with new bolts camp.

RPD

So, RPD, forgive my cluelessness, but are you referring specifically to the split in picture question no. 4? I understand what you are saying about the procedure for a separating pinblock.

I was thinking of hide glue and bar clamps to put the case board that caps the pinblock back in place, but before doing that, wondered about those little holes and that one place where the wood is starting to split, which is the reason for my clueless question to you. Other than that one place, the pinblock looks sound (from the top, at least! )

Thank you! I really appreciate your answer!

What I'm saying is that IF the pin block is splitting (and that's a subtle determination that I can't tell exactly from your pics (i.e. its not too far apart probably) then my idea is the way to fix it.

If, however you are experiencing noise or buzzing from other issues like the hollow space you show in one of the pics, that might be something else.

I guess I'm thinking that the buzzing could have been the cover piece over the pin block, and if that's the case, I'd just eliminate that or install it again with a few screws and some felt to keep it quiet...

Not sure if that's an answer, but hopefully it is...

RPD

Andy,

The first thing I thought when I saw the exposed pinblock was that thankfully, it is NOT separating. I can see that easily and I don't have the good of vision. However, RPD's ideas are good when the time comes that you do find that condition in some small vertical that you may acquire in the future. It is a fairly common problem. I attempted such a repair about 30 years ago and the plate broke about 12 hours after I brought it up to pitch. As the Wicked Witch of the West said, "These things must be done very delicately".

That decorative piece that you pulled off fools many people into thinking they are actually looking at the pinblock. I am sure it was designed to look just like that. A dealer I worked for long ago who was not a technician thought it was. When I pulled it off and saw a badly separating back structure, he knew he had blown it by offering anything at all for the piano in trade.

I don't have enough expertise to say for sure about the worm holes nor can I see exactly what is in that small rectangle. If you have a magnifying glass and you can see what looks like it must be a bug nest, then it is. My guess is that it is only factory debris in there. I also guess that the worm holes were there when the piano was built. They don't really matter if they were and probably doesn't matter if the wood had some bugs in it when the piano was built and they were essentially buried alive.

Those splinters look ugly but I doubt that they were causing any of the buzzing. A fine piano manufacturer would not do things that way but this was obviously a low end piano. Those splinters are only a cosmetic flaw as the worm holes are if they were there when the piano was built. The factory figured they would never be seen, so they did not matter at all.

You can, just to eliminate any possibility of those splinters vibrating, simply chisel off any long and loose ends. That one non-parallel split is also not a sign of any failure, in my opinion. It is simply a surface flaw in the wood that was there when the piano was made and not the result of stress. It is not along the glue lines of the laminates. You could fill it with some CA glue but I don't think it would help anything nor hurt anything if you do.

My opinion is that you were correct in your analysis that the buzzing was from partial failure of the glue that originally held that decorative piece in place. As portions popped loose, they set up their own chambers that would vibrate in sympathy with tones from the piano. If you did something like place your hand heavily on a portion of it while playing certain keys and the buzzing stopped, that would confirm it. Also, the higher humidity of the season may well have caused that decorative piece to swell and create pockets that would vibrate. They perhaps didn't during a lower humidity period.

RPD's idea of placing felt over the pinblock area and screwing down that decorative piece would work but I feel that it would be unnecessary and spoil the decorative intent of that piece. All you really need to do is properly glue it back into place.

You have the right idea about that. Sand both surfaces thoroughly and wipe off and/or vacuum up any dust that you create. Before sanding the pinblock and especially before spreading any glue on it, use some masking tape and affix some old newspaper across the piano about 1/2 inch below the pinblock and spread the paper over the action to keep any dust from settling in it and to catch any glue that may drip down when it squeezes out.

Bar clamps are also the right idea but you will also need a pressure caul. If you can find one long 2x4 or a few shorter ones, you will want to place the 2x4 or segments on the decorative piece and clamp down on the caul. That will give you even pressure across it. If you don't use a pressure caul, you will likely cause parts of the decorative piece to bow up in places between the clamps.

After sanding, spread the glue liberally and evenly on both surfaces. Since it is a slow setting glue, you will have plenty of time but do that as quickly as you can. Put the decorative piece in place. Then place the caul(s)on it and set the bar clamps. Two clamps at each end may suffice if you have a long caul but three or four may be better. Put the pressure on lightly at first, tightening each clamp evenly, a little at a time.

Check to make sure the decorative piece has not shifted. If it does, loosen the clamps just enough so that you can move it back into place. The lid hinges may actually help prevent the decorative piece from shifting towards the back and can help you determine if it has shifted forward so leave them in place.

When all the pressure is on, quickly wipe the glue squeeze away, first with a dry cloth, then a damp one. The glue squeeze is an important indicator that the decorative piece is firmly clamped to the pinblock. I suggest leaving it clamped for 48 hours.

If you can get their attention on this, please run by what I said with Del Fandrich and Larry Buck.

I did not read all of the thread. This piano is dead, no amount of money will make it worthwhile.

If it it is for experimental purposes, cool!

Please let us know how it goes.

Thanks

One thing you have not said is whether the buzzing went away when you removed that board. If it did not, it is someplace else.

And, that would be the best cosmetic repair actually. I think my idea is just floated to keep your options open to keep looking periodically at the block if you're worried about it...but yeah, otherwise if you're satisfied its solid then your best option is to do as Bill suggests.

RPD

Did the buzzing go away when you removed the cap-board? If so, just leave it off.

That's what I've done a few times where the block is showing minor cracking and I want to watch it...I usually mark the edge end of the crack with pencil and see what its done next visit...but in those cases the whole thing started because of lack of tuning stability or obvious failure of the structure...

But yeah, did the buzzing stop after removing the cap?

RPD

Thank you, all, for your replies! I know it takes time to read and write them up, and I really appreciate the advice and the help.




Jean, your comment that my piano is dead is very funny. Very very funny, indeed. This piano actually has lots of musical life left in it. [Ah-ha! I just saw many of you roll your eyes at the same time! ]

As far as "experimental purposes" go, well, Reblitz does say to practice first on pianos of little value, and I will grant you that this piano will garner LITTLE to NO dollars in the sales department. I know I am fixing up a Chevette. But it is a very pretty-sounding Chevette!




Hey, BDB! (And everyone else who asked the obvious question! ) Actually, MOST of the buzzing went away, and the piano regained it's clear singing tone again, EXCEPT for a quick "growfy" buzz on the attack from G3 to C4 that is most prounounced when the notes are played fortissimo. So, removing the board confirmed one problem, and helped define another!



RPD, this is an interesting idea! If I am imagining this correctly, I would need to line the whole underside of the cap board with a big piece of felt to eliminate hollow spaces, right? (See below for concerns about volume). Or, a border of someting like 1" felt? Or, are you thinking little felt pads where the screws would go? And are you thinking to use probably six screws, one in each corner and two on either side mid-way down the board? Do I have to worry about any specific effect or placement of drilling a pilot hole into the pinblock? (Miss the bolts, yes, but anything else?)




What I noticed while playing the piano last night, Dave, is that leaving the cap board off is like playing with the lid "at half stick." What I mean is, that even with the lid down, the extra air space created by the removal of the pin block cap board, which is 5/16" thick, noticeably effects the volume of the sound. So, for that reason alone, I think I would want to put it back.

But there is also the issue of leaving the other wood exposed to dust and moisture. In my brief history of piano tinkerage, I have come to the conclusion that there are no unnecessary parts on a piano.




Bill, I have a tool called a "masker" that dispenses masking tape and brown paper together and makes your newspaper protection idea a snap to do! It can also be used to dispense plastic instead of paper. Depending on how much masking you do in your life, this can be a real time saver. I have not tried it on beat masking, though...




Thank you all for your kind help on my learning journey!

--Andy

If the above is true, the piece which I called "decorative" (which it clearly is) may also serve to reflect sound. Without it, some of the sound may be absorbed and lost. If you put felt under it, it could defeat its reflecting potential. The fact that it vibrated is a clear indicator that sound does reach it. If it is firmly and solidly re-glued back in place, its reflecting potential may be enhanced.

Always remember that noises and vibrations can and do come from different places. We have already tracked down and eliminated many of them. The loose panel is yet another. Be sure to trim off those long splinters. Whatever other noise remains must be coming from another place.

Jean,

The piano is definitely not "dead"! You have jumped to conclusions. It is a lovely sounding spinet.

I did jump to conclusions, I should of looked and read more closely. Oops, my bad. Good luck with the repairs, you have received excellent advice.

Jean

With my usual caution about diagnosing sounds without actually listening to them, I would say that could be a voicing problem. The first thing I would try is filing the hammers a bit.

Hi Andy,

No need for more advice from me, you've gotten plenty of good advice and yes, your piano is far from being dead. I know Bill B is taking good care of it too. Maybe have Bill plan on extra time to possibly address this situation for you as long as he's coming to tune the piano anyway and then afterward, you should record something and post it on HERE for us to hear. Your recordings are always lovely....

Otherwise, like we say? "What they said!"

Jer

I believe this is the very same instrument?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xeXeifJz3Ow
It is definitely not dead but sounds incredibly beautiful and appropriate for the music played. The performance is exemplary and has me entranced.

Yeah, he's not a bad piano player either is he! Good job Andy!

Jer,
Thanks for the encouragement! I will certainly post a recording HERE when the next round of work is done. BTW, I have learned to save my nickles and book Bill for a whole day. That way, it makes his trip to Rockford worthwhile, gives us plenty of time to make discoveries and address them, and there is always plenty to do, if not on the Lester, then over to the Haddorff!

Chris,
That is, indeed, the very piano! I'm glad you liked the Beethoven. That recording was made after the first major round of work Bill and I (mostly Bill! ) did last November, in which I learned how to take the action in and out of the piano and also adjust the capstans, and Bill reshaped the hammers and started working on damper alignment, which had been a problem with this little guy since I bought it 15 or so years ago. The recording was made after a fresh tuning, but some of the dampers were still behaving badly, which I attempted to adjust (rather badly with... um... not the right tools (which I have, now! )) and it effected the sound.

This recording (boxnet: The Nearness of You) was made after the last round of work in March, in which we (mostly Bill) replaced the damper felts and regulated everything. There were still a few dampers that needed some finessey wire bending, but time ran out, I still didn't have the tools, yet, and had learned my lesson about the limitations of needle nosed pliers.

Regarding the appropriateness of the Beethoven, I have been working up a Clementi and a Mozart Sonatina, and some Beethoven Bagatelles, which seem to fit the piano really well, as well as some small, spritely Kabalevsky pieces which sound really cute on this little guy!

Jean,
You have my utmost admiration for making an "oops" post! It is something not seen very often in these parts! Perhaps, if you listen to "The Nearness of You" above, you might hear what I hear that attracted me to this piano, and why I can't let go of it.

BDB,
I thought about voicing, too. It is entirely possible. Even though Bill re-shaped the hammers less than a year ago, I have played them to grooves, already! But this piano has always had strange things going on it that zone, sound-wise (G3 to C4), and each time we quiet down one noise or set of noises, we find more to deal with. I wish you were here to take a look and a listen--I'll keep you posted!

As far as the fix goes, I think I'm going to glue that cap board back into place, because I don't want to change the way the piano sings. As soon as I collect enough pipe clamps from friends and neighbors, I'll post a picture of that, too!

Thanks again, for all of your help!

--Andy

Excellent playing. You are proof that it 'is' the 'player' that makes a piano sound good. Thank you.

Well, I dood it. I went with straps instead of bar clamps because I wasn't convinced I could get the pressure as evenly distributed from back to front with bar clamps. This meant I had to take the action out, but practice makes ______________.





When I sanded off all of the old glue, the top of the pinblock looked really good.

Here are the mistakes I made (that I know about):

1) When sanding the bottom of the cap board, I wrecked the finish on the other side, the top. It's not like I didn't plan ahead and pad it first, but I lost track of the padding while I was sanding, and I should have clamped the board down to sand it. Total rookie mistake. Or worse. So, I sanded the top down with 220, and it looks o.k., but it should probably be coated with something. Since I didn't know what (shellac? lacquer?) I left it alone for now. It is still (mostly) sealed.

2) When ratcheting down the straps, a little stream of glue trickled down the masking paper and dripped on a few wound strings. Damn! I figured, rather than washing it off with water, I'd be better off letting it dry and crackling it off with a wire brush. It really is a teeny tiny amount, but the fact that I did it still ticks me off. Glad it's my own piano of little or no monetary value! Gotta start somewhere... Live and learn... Fools rush in... Fill in your own favorite aphorism here: ____________________. Hey, be nice!!!

Bill comes over tomorrow. If all goes as planned, I should have some recordings to share with you soon! (I've got a special one in mind for you, Jer! )

--Andy

Andy,

The clamping system looks like pure professionalism! The finished surface could be renewed with a coat of clear spray lacquer. That is difficult to find in a hardware store but you can get it from Schaff.

Well, looks can be deceiving. And while I appreciate the compliment, here is what actually happened (as you now know, Bill! )

About two hours after I posted this picture, I went to check on things. I noticed I could see light through the bass end of the board, and that the treble end, and some of the sides, did not pass the tap test. So, I got my syringe, and found a few more band clamps, and went to work again. Here is what the clamping part of it looked like, finally:



When it dried, everything was nice and solid.



I wish I remembered everything we did to the Lester on Bill's visits. We regulated the snot out of it, again, but this time, I got to drive! Bill had me do the key dip, let-off, after touch, and back checks while he looked over my shoulder and checked everything, then we worked on refining the damper adjustments and tuning. Bill decided to tune it aurally at A442, since the piano had gone consistently sharp, and would just go more or less consistently flat in the winter when he came back to tune it. Here's me, trying the "tap technique," and I can honestly say, when the unison snaps into place, you know it!



Only, at the temperament stage of tuning, that buzzy, growfy, growl in the C4 range was getting in the way, so, BDB, we tracked it down. It happened to be the soundboard separating from the ribs that my previous fix of soundboard cracks did not catch. I had used cold hide glue for the soundboard fix, but apparently it was too thick to reach some places, because you should have seen the CA glue dive between the ribs and the soundboard. It was quite profound. That was Wednesday. When Bill came back Friday to work on the Haddorff and finish working on the Lester, the growfy buzz was completely gone! I was still not happy with the results of some of the damper work in the problem area, so we did surgery, slicing off the felts and re-positioning them. Some of the wedges were not cooperating at all, so we modified some of the dampers with left-over felt that I had from the first round of the project. It's not pretty, but it seems to be getting the job done. We clamped the dampers down with wedge mutes, the only proper use for them (KIDDING Ryan!!! KIDDING!!! )





Time was running out, again, so Bill roughed in the tuning and agreed to come back Monday to do a fine tuning that would hold up to scrutiny for my recordings for the "Un-sung Heroes E-cital" (it's a Pianist Corner thing...Goes live August 20th, if you're interested...).

In the meantime, I made one recording that I promised Jerry Groot, RPT (see above). The tuning is fine enough for this performance. I kind of like it at 442.

So, by way of introduction to this "performance," I would like to say that, if you have followed any of my other posts in Pianist Corner, you will know that I have been working my way through the "Wizard of Oz" songbook, after buying it for a step in the "Over the Rainbow" project. These arrangements of pieces from the movie are marketed, probably, to parlor pianists sometime around 1939. I find it interesting that almost all of the songs have an introduction section, complete with lyrics, that does not appear in the music of the movie.

Jerry, this particular piece makes me think of you. Every time I play it, I think, "I bet this is what life is like in Jer's piano shop!" So, here's your new theme song:

Jer's Piano Shop Song

Enjoy!
--Andy

Wow Andy!

That sounds really good for a spinet! A very enjoyable recording to listen to! Thanks for posting

Well, thank you Andy! I'm honored! Great job on the piano playing and singing too! Reminds me of the Wizard of Oz alright! Your sense of humor is wonderful too! I love it! Nothing like this after returning home from vacation! Thanks!

Sounds like you two did a great regulation and voicing job on that piano too! Pretty nice sounding piano for a Lester spinet!

Jer

Mostly Bill!

More recordings (of a more *ahem* serious nature) to come...

The soundboard repair did more than eliminate a "barking" sound in the low tenor and elusive buzzing elsewhere. It gave the piano a solid and consistent sound which should also prove to be more stable. No voicing was done during this session. All the needling in the world could not do what some strategically placed CA glue did, at least in this instance.

See you about 2 PM, Andy!

Well, here is the first of what I hope is to be a batch of recordings this week...

This is a Sonatina by Cornelius Gurlitt (1820-1901). It is a little cheesey in the composition department, but it has a quaint appeal.

It goes:

I. Moderato
II. Adagio non troppo
III. Allegretto

Gurlitt, Sonatina in C Major, Op. 54, No. 1

Bill tuned The Mighty Lester at A443, because that's where it wanted to go. EBVT III, of course.

As always, comments are welcomed!

--Andy Strong

I've never heard this or any other spinet sound sweeter!

Thank you, Bill. My goal is to make some recording art that's worthy of the tuning while the tuning is still fairly fresh! I think I still need to needle some more. Now that I have a better idea of what to listen for, I can hear a lot of discrepancies in the hammers up and down the scale.

Here's a piece that kind of pushes the boundaries of the piano a bit, at least in terms of loudness. I recorded it for the Un-sung Heroes E-cital, which goes live on Saturday. I'm letting you guys get first crack at it. Shhh. Don't tell anybody in Pianist Corner!

Alexandre Tansman--La Grande et la Petite Ourses (The Big and Little Dipper) (appx. 2 mins.)

--Andy

Andy,

Where is the recording equipment relative to the might Lester? And did you add any reverb or "hall effects" during post-processing?

Andy,

I guess it is because you only work with that one piano for now, over and over but you seem to be developing a fine ear for voicing. For me, when I tune, I kind of "turn off" my voicing ear and concentrate only on the beats for tuning.

Of course, when voicing, all unisons have to be perfect. Any faulty unison will then stick out when listening for unevenness. Since unisons are the first to go in any piano, you may have to do some of that kind of correction yourself but I think you already have it within you to do it.

Voicing can be a long and tedious process, often taking more time than tuning just to weed out and suppress any notes that seem brighter than the others. The fine unison tuning is usually a part of that process.

I am eager to start you learning to tune. As soon as we can get the Haddorff up and running adequately again, I think that would be a good instrument to start you on aural tuning. I can also loan you my SAT III, put the Lester custom program on it which will allow you to maintain the Lester tuning.

I usually discourage the use of an ETD at first for beginning tuners because they all too often become dependent on it and therefore don't develop the necessary aural skills but there are always exceptions. Many beginning tuners like to be able to check their work with an ETD. Some teachers encourage that. If you were younger, such as in your early 20's, I might insist on the aural only approach but I think you have enough maturity and perception to be able to make use of both.

When I listen to the recordings of the Lester, the treble sounds very good but octaves played across the break sound at least somewhat questionable. What I found both aurally and electronically was that the wound strings have markedly high inharmonicity, way over and far above nearly any piano that I have ever encountered.

Earlier recordings elicited comments from some people on Pianotech who said the Bass sounded "horribly out of tune and sharp". While in these latest recordings, I am not hearing any sharpness, I do hear that in order to avoid that, I had to make the octaves wider than I usually ever would on any piano.

The Bass is really a dilemma to tune. It is even worse than those very short scaled Yamaha Electric (CP 70 & 80) pianos of the 1980's. Both technicians and the artists often complained of "growly" or out of tune Bass sections in those pianos. There was always a "best that one could do" with them but they never really sounded right no matter what. That is the case with your Lester. So, you may get some such feedback from the Piano Forums.

If and when you do, I would suggest answering with the following as a matter-of-fact statement from your technician: "According to my technician in who I have full faith and confidence, my piano is a very short scaled Spinet which was built with a very compromised wound string section. It has confounded every technician who has ever tried to tune it. Briefly stated, it is virtually impossible to tune satisfactorily. It presents such a dilemma that one kind of compromise always creates another kind of problem. In this case, the purity of octaves were compromised so that other intervals may sound better in tune."

You will recall the remarks I made about what I observed about the wound strings. The windings do not extend as far as they could. I believe the three string unisons in the upper Bass were not well calculated, only a guess (especially considering the astronomically high amount of inharmonicity they have).

In just about any other scale configuration, the highest wound strings have much lower inharmonicity than their neighboring plain wire. In your piano, that relationship is inverted. The break is right in the middle of the Temperament octave. While the electronic figures in this area are usually quite predictable, the results I got when tuning aurally, then reading electronically were significantly different from any other piano I have ever created a program for.

So, while rescaling a spinet is usually considered to be out of the question in terms of cost versus results, it will be interesting to see (if you indeed go ahead with that at sometime in the future), how much improvement you can actually make. After solving the most difficult of problems, future rescaling efforts will then seem easy and routine.

I'd love to see you get a hold of an Acrosonic some day to see what we could do with one of those. Some of them are real beauties but always had a scale design that technicians hated. Baldwin was well aware of how bad they were but chose not to do anything about them. Many of those surviving instruments can be re-made into absolute gems of American craftsmanship in the future to which no Chinese piano will ever compare. I see that as a future for you in which you will be able to make a good living in your later life.

Bill,

Interesting... I sent Andy a comment just yesterday that the tuning sounds very musical, but octaves across the break (specifically C3-C4, also D3-D4) are "weird" (for lack of a better word), even though the separate notes of the octave sound in tune with the harmony of the piece. Now I understand why.

Out of curiosity: would the fact that Andy's Lester is currently at 443 Hz contribute significantly to these inharmonicity issues, i.e. would lowering the pitch to 440 or even 437 make a significant difference? My guess would be: not much.

Bill:

Thanks for pointing out those awful octaves and that the reason was a compromise. My opinion of your integrity has gone up quite a bit as a result.

Another compromise to consider is pure twelfths. They would make the 5ths and the 2:1 octaves beat at the same speed.

Hi, Mark!--

You don't want me to reveal all of my secrets, do you?

Oh, well... O.K.... Since you asked.

Here is a picture of the Mighty Lester in recording mode:



As you can imagine, the room is not all that reverberant. It is, in fact, quite dry, which makes it an excellent place to make "recording art."

Yes, those are Kleenex boxes, which serve as microphone stands. There is also usually a score on the rack, because I hardly play anything from memory. The microphones are two 1970s-era Sony Electret Condeser mics (ECM 220), which I run to a Yamaha Audiogram 6 USB interface into my computer to CuBase AI4 recording and editing software.

I record a bunch of "takes," then splice together the best of the best, such as they are. That's why I call it "recording art," as opposed to "a recording of my performance." I always leave in a few performance flaws, because, well, there they are. I could edit to the hilt, but I don't want people to get the impression that I'm a better pianist than I am. I shoot for a rendition that captures what I can do on my best days. I discussed my recording philosophy in a paragraph in this thread in Pianist Corner, Member Recordings sub-forum.

When I get the recording edited the way I want it, then I copy the track, and paste it again into CuBase, so that I have two tracks of the same thing. On one track, I add hall reverb and spread the stereo pan a bit to provide "ambience." The other track I leave as is to provide the piano detail. I usually mix the volume so that the reverbed track is underneath the non-enhanced track. What I am attempting to do is to mimic the sound of a 4-microphone recording, made in a good-sized performance hall, with stereo mics at the piano, and stereo mics in the hall. When I get the reverb mix right, then I see if any EQing is needed. In this current batch of recordings, I cut a deep thin swath around 7008 Hz, because there was a raspy metallic zing getting in the way. I raised the bass a hair and also did a slight curvy cut in the midrange, and boosted a little bit of the treble. This softens the sound a little. I will have more comments to make about the piano's tone in my reply to Bill's post, above. I did not use any limiters or compression in treating the recording, but I did adjust the compression up a bit on the input board because I was concerned about clipping, especially in the Tansman pieces and in the lively Clementi (soon to be posted).

After the CuBase work is done, I dump the file into DC8 (Diamond Cut 8), which I use for noise reduction. I run it through a noise filter, then I run it through a "virtual valve filter" to give it that nice warm tube amp sound. After that, it's over to a file converter to turn the .wav file into MP3, and upload to boxnet for the whole world to scutinize-- uh, I mean, enjoy.

I think it was in the "My Piano in EBVT III" thread where I shared my secret fantasy of performing the world's notable performance venues with The Mighty Lester. What you have here, really, is "Walter Mitty plays The Mighty Lester at Moscow Conservatory." Actually, I just want to make a sound that is pleasant to listen to, of music that people might like to hear.

I have also posted recordings that were not enhanced in any way. "The Nearness of You," linked in this post, above, is one such recording. It is a simple A-B, close mic'd, stereo recording. I didn't even EQ it. The piano sounded so sweet, and the piece was so quiet and intimate, that enhancements would have ruined it, in my opinion. The classical pieces, though, need to wear the tux, I think.

--Andy

Bill,

Thank you so much for that wonderful explanation! ...And for the vote of confidence about where I'm headed. I, too, am eager to learn to tune, and I appreciate the tech instruction and encouragement that you've already given me! I am a little reluctant to "clean up unisons," yet, because I don't want to wreck the tuning before I've finished recording. But once that that step is out of the way--watch out!

Below are a few thoughts. The quoted sections are not in the order they appeared in your OP:



These paragraphs made me smile. The scrutiny and comments I get in Pianist Corner are more to do with technique and musicality than about the piano! "Rushed the ending." "Uneven trill." "Didn't observe the dotted half." Etc. I always make sure to let people know it's a spinet, though, because I don't want them to get their hopes up too high about the sound. Then, when they hear it, they are usually very pleasantly surprised (as am I ). I also enjoy the challenge of making pretty music on a quirky instrument. But I must say that, after all of this work we've done (mostly you ), the piano is a LOT less quirky!

The kinds of scrutiny that the piano gets in this forum, however, is a whole different matter! I wish people could sit down at the Lester, now, and feel the way it plays!



One of my first posts in the Tuner/Tech forum (which got me slapped with some rhetorical paws from a few incredulous experienced technicians) was about whether or not to soup up my Lester by re-scaling (didn't know the term back then...) or get a new piano. As you know, I decided to soup up the Lester because I liked the feel of the action so much and the pretty singing tone and nothing in the local piano store beat it. Shortly after that, I picked up the Schiller for free (still in pieces) and the Haddorff for, basically, a song, (which has bass for miles), and now I have three project pianos! But that's why I've been putting money into the Lester--for the experience AND because I believe in the instrument itself. I still have plans to make pretty music with it, and when I am gone, hopefully someone will get a very nice little spinet--not real pretty, but plays like a dream!





Now, this is going to sound really stupid, probably, but after this last round of work where we finally got everything glued down good and solid, the piano sounds like a spinet! I don't know--but, what I mean is, the place that I now know is the "tenor break," sounds honkier than ever, doesn't it?! I haven't gone back to study other recordings, but I don't recall such a pronounced honky spinet character. Is this what you meant about replacing a few of the strings above the tenor break with wound strings to even out the sound (along with re-scaling the bass)?

I also wondered the same thing as Mark R. Is the A443 also exacerbating the honk? I didn't seem to mind the A442 of the roughed-in tuning, but the A443 seems so tight! I know it wanted to be there--I'm pretty sure I understand that concept. But I also kept thinking, as I was recording, that I wanted to hear the bass octaves even wider! Am I crazy? When you tuned the piano this winter, and I recorded "The Nearness of You," and "Over The Rainbow" and "April in Paris," you had tuned the octaves very wide, and it really opened up the piano beautifully. That's why I wondered if I really wanted to hear wider octaves, or am I just responding to the higher pitch, or is the piano reverberating differently with everything back in place, or all of the above, or all of the above plus lots of other things, too? I'm asking as a noobie learner.

Well, on to the music!

The Clementi you ordered came in :

Clementi--Sonatina in D maj, Op. 36, No. 6

This one goes:

I. Allegro con spirito
II. Rondo--Allegretto spiritoso

Total running time: appx. 6 1/2 mins.

It's not perfect--I decided to not take the second repeat of the first movement, I rushed the ending of the first movement, I didn't execute the climactic trill of the second movement very well, I really wanted to put a more deliberate accent on the third and sixth beat in the doop doop doops in the second movement, etc., etc. A year from now, I hope I can finesse the piece a little better, but hopefully this is respecabibble enough to be enjoyed.

Thanks!
--Andy

Mark,

I would not have any hard data about the difference in inharmonicity between A-440 and 443 but your guess would be mine too, not much. There is really only one solution to a scaling problem: re-scaling.

That being said, however, many of these smaller instruments do seem to sound "mellower" at A-435. If there is anyone else who might have a more concrete answer, be sure to chime in.

If we ever do get around to re-scaling, I would like to plot out what exactly is on the piano now and the improvements that re-scaling would make graphically. If the exact speaking lengths, core wire, winding dimensions, both in terms of winding sizes and how far they extend are known, the differences that string tensions (at 435, 440, 442 & 443) would make may be better known.

Of course, I cannot claim to be a piano designer, however I did do many scale redesigns manually back in the late 80's and early 90's and there was always an improvement. That was before I even had a computer. Now there are scale design programs that make it relatively easy to make decisions and see which options there may be in advance.

What I observed is based merely upon so many years experience of encountering different types and sizes of pianos and what I have read and heard people who are experienced rescalers say. I saw an inch or more of plain wire on either end of the strings. I know from what I have read and heard that the same speaking length can sound far better if more of it is covered by a winding. Lighter gauges of both core and winding could be used but still have adequate mass.

Take my own Walter console, for example. The Walters have Schaff Piano Supply make the strings but they have to pay more for them to have them very carefully and precisely made as opposed to what those string makers usually make. So, I know that Andy can have a local maker do them without having to resort to some far off custom maker.

It would require a very precisely made pattern along with carefully made measurements. The double wound strings could extend to 1/2 inch from the termination points and the inner winding could extend to 1 inch. A special "coning" finish to each of those strings would have to be done and would of course, cost more.

The trichords in the upper Bass appear to be too heavy. Perhaps too thick of core wire and also too heavy of a winding. My hunch is that trichords were not necessary. Those half dozen unisons might be better served with the usual bichords but a lighter core wire and winding.

The break is between G#3 and A3. On such a small piano, the low tenor may also be better served with perhaps two more wound string bichords. Those may well have to have a relatively thin core and a very fine winding in which the end doubles back under the winding in order for it to remain secure. There is probably a name for that kind of technique but I do not know what it is.

That would extend wound strings up to A#3. Perhaps four of the lowest plain wire could sound better and stay in tune better if they were converted to a heavier core diameter and reduced to plain wire bichords.

I know Del Fandrich (a well known designer who is particularly good at small piano design) does not like the idea of plain wire bichords but I once used it on a Cable console that I got for free after a fire. The piano needed restringing, so I rescaled it with very excellent results. After about 20 years, I still tune it and it has the smoothest break and stays in tune better than any other piano of that same make and original design.

From what I have seen Del write, he has excluded plain wire bichords from any of his designs citing a tone problem. I respect that opinion and note it but I also believe there is a time and place for everything. Heavier core wire will naturally sound louder and brassier. Therefore, reducing the unison to two strings will help with that problem. There is also a slight increase in inharmonicity but it is not significantly bad.

The break between plain wire and wound strings is usually quite evident on nearly any piano except the very largest. The smaller the piano, the more it is usually evident. Del's design of the smaller Walter Grand is a shining example of the very smoothest transition from plain wire to wound strings on any smaller piano I have ever heard! However, this small piano would not permit what he does to get that and that is to create a short low Tenor bridge and tie it to the Bass. We would have to work with what is there.

There should have been ways to manually figure scales even when the Lester was built. Perhaps incomplete knowledge and bearing in mind that not all scales would end up with exactly the same speaking lengths and wanting to avoid windings that may come too close to termination points from wound string makers who were perhaps not as precise as they could be, the strings were made mostly with the idea that they would fit.

In just looking at the whole thing, it looks to me like the designer merely guessed at what would work. I have never heard trichord wound strings that sounded very good except those on a Steinway D model 9 foot concert grand. The Lester wound trichords are overly loud, wildly inharmonic and so close together that it is difficult to get trichord wedge dampers to work satisfactorily. That leads me to the conclusion they should be replaced with carefully designed bichords.

Replacing the two lowest Tenor plain wire with finely wound strings and replacing the next four unisons with heavier plain wire would carry the alteration up to D4. I believe a smooth and consistent sound could be achieved that way. The low Tenor could be more easily tuned and would stay in tune better.

Thanks Jeff,

It was really the best I could do with it. If anyone had written the same as I had seen before about how "horribly out of tune" those octaves sound, I would have invited them to prove they could do better.

Bill,
I had a moment of clarity upon waking this morning, and I do want to proceed with re-scaling. Foolishness to some, but I am excited by the prospect. In my "moment of clarity" I could hear in my mind what the stringing changes you are suggesting could do, and now I want to know for sure. The Lester has never sounded better since you got your hands on it. Let's go for it! Haddorff, first though. I think I can handle the key levelling on it and we can get together sometime this fall and bring that beast into shape.

All,
If you read my thoughts about the difference in the kind of scrutiny recordings get here in the Tuner/Tech forum vs. Pianist Corner, I thought you might like to see this. I posted the Clementi Sonatina over there last night, and this came in:



Jaak didn't mention the piano at all. I am curious about something. Forgive me for laying out some truisms first: Tech-ing a piano is so different from playing a piano. What the tech hawks down on is so different than what the performer hawks down on. I wonder, have any of you ever been so focussed on a tech issue that you lost sight of an aspect of teching that negatively impacted the performer's work? Or, have you ever proceeded with knowledge that you knew the right dimension for this or the right measurement for that, only to have it fail once a performer sat down to put the instrument through its paces? Perhaps this question should go in a separate "True Confessions" thread... But I really am curious!

--Andy

Did this one today:

Alexandre Tansman--Mars (appx. 2 mins.)

--Andy

From this morning's funny page:



So, --uh--, forget I asked...

Plus, Bill, here's a P.S. that I forgot to put in my reply, above, regarding getting an Arcosonic to work on. I actually know where to find one, but my wife says, "No more pianos come into the house unless an equal number of pianos go out of the house!!!"

Remember, after I got the Haddorff, she was reading the classified ads to me every morning like this, " 'Wellington upgright. Black with bench. Good condition. $50.,' ...and you can't have it!"

--Andy

Andy,

I know you like both the Lester and the Haddorff and those should be the pianos you first get going. It appears that the Lester is doing well for the time being. I don't consider anything that has been done to it yet as fitting the description of "souped up" (I think that should be "suped up" from the Latin origin word, "super"). The online dictionary does not recognize either word but when searching "suped" I found this in the side bar:



All we ever did with the Lester is make it be what the manufacturer ostensibly intended it to be. There were no modifications other than the replacement of deteriorated damper felt. The hammer reshaping was to compensate for wear and the regulation, while to close tolerances, was only what any piano can have done with it in order to play the best that it can.

As the material about "suped up" cars implies, outright design modifications and add-ons would be more at "suping it up". I'm afraid you've been the target of all too many people who never want or never will give such a modest piano what it is due. They always cite the economic infeasibility of it. The I only do Steinways bunch. If I were to stoop to actually voicing and regulating a spinet, you would have to pay me 10 times what the piano is even worth! So, forget it, throw it out, put it on the curb and buy a new one. Buy a Bösendorfer Imperial instead.

I would not even consider string re-scaling and new hammers to be "suping" it up. That would just bring out the best that the little piano would have to offer. If you modified the bridges such as adding a short Tenor bridge and re-did the Bass apron, maybe that would qualify as "suping" it up but I think that is out of the question.

The most that might be done in that regard would be to add one or two round copper weights to the back of the soundboard behind the low end of the low tenor bridge and possibly the upper end of the long Bass bridge where the ultimate volume after rescaling may be over bearing. If these parts of the piano end up being too loud, those weights will provide impedance that would calm them down and balance them with the rest of the piano. That also would not qualify as "suping" it up but simply balancing out the sound.

These can be found on certain models of Baldwin pianos. Designers like Del Fandrich have used them. The need for them can be determined much like the test we did to find the source of the last buzzing we eliminated. While certain notes were played, pressing on the bridge stopped them and that told me that there was separation from the ribs.

If, upon rescaling, the low Tenor and upper Bass sound too loud, pressing on the soundboard from the rear to suppress the stronger response from these areas would indicate that a weight placed at those points would serve to balance the sound. If such an idea works, you can use the experience you gain with that modification to use in future rescaling efforts.

So, I think your best plan would be to move on to the Haddorff, learn to tune on it and enjoy it as your second piano. Then get the Schiller repaired and reconditioned and sell it. Get some return on your time and investment for once. Then, if that Acrosonic is still available, acquire it.

You can start working on it but then might be the time to go for the rescaling of the Lester. Get that done and learn what kinds of improvements you can make to a short scaled piano. Meanwhile you can have case refinishing, key recovering and rebushing of the Acrosonic in the works, as well as new hammers.

When you have most of the other tasks done with the Acrosonic, you can go for the rescaling and new damper felts. You could end up with a true gem of a piano that you may actually be able to sell at a handsome windfall, if not profit. There are bound to be people who would go for such a piano over a cheap Chinese made piano just because of the distinctive cabinet and undoubtedly a terrific sound and lightning fast action.

Excellent post, Bill! Thanks!!!

So, get a load of this...

Here is a "found suite" of Kabalevsky pieces from the book, "Anson Introduces Kabalevsky, book two." These pieces flow so nicely together, one after the other, and I've been meaning to record them as a suite for some time, now. I've posted two of these pieces, earlier, in the "My Piano in EBVT III" thread, but here they are, freshly recorded and in "context."

The reason I am so excited about this is because of the way the Lester sounds! In this (edited) recording, I have added NO sound enhancements--no reverb, no EQ, and no noise reduction, either, because I didn't want to strip off any highs. It came right out of the piano and into the computer. So, you will hear some microphone hiss, but I trust that it is tolerable. The bass is quite wide enough! I left the air conditioning off, like you said, Bill, and a front moved through with some humidity, and it seemed to really open up the sound some more. At least, it doesn't sound "tight" to me like it did, and that "honk" is gone. AND, listen to that G3 damper do its job!

So, take a seat in my dry living room, and enjoy the sound of this pretty little piano!

Kabalevsky--a "found suite" (running time: appx. 10 mins.)

--Andy

P.S.--one of these pieces features the "pipe organ" effect!

Andy,

That music was new to me - interesting and quaint!

The second movement brings out the effect that we discussed. Listen to the left hand broken chords, especially from 0:55 onwards.

While B3 and G3, with which the movement opens, still have some sustain, A3 (and also D3) sound almost as though they are played at half-pedal: a thunky attack followed by a quick decay; what little sustain there is, follows only at much lower volume and later in the decay curve.

That's what I hear, and I keep wondering about it...

Mark,
I don't know! Voicing? Wonky dampers? Worn hammer butt felt? Artist error?

All,
Thank you for taking such kind interest in my ugly duckling piano, which, if it does not turn into a swan, may perhaps turn into a wren, a lark, or a wood thrush.

Here is the last recording of the bunch that I did last week when the tuning was fresh. It is edited and enhanced. "Walter Mitty plays The Mighty Lester for Deutsche Grammaphone."

Mozart Sonata No. 3, [K. 545]

It goes:

I. Allegro (I think I took it Andante, which is how I think it should go...)
II. Andante (I think I took it Andante, but it feels like Allegro, which is not how I think it should go... Adagio would have been better.)
III. Rondo--Allegretto grazioso (just right)

The whole thing is about 12 mins.

Thanks, again, to Bill Bremmer, who treats my Lester like a Steinwayfaziolibosendorfer to make it feel like the Yamaha I always wanted.

--Andy

Andy,

That rendition of the Mozart sonata is definitely going on my website! It is really very sweet!

Crossposted at Pianist Corner--Member Recordings

I stumbled on this book of Christmas arrangements that really, really appealed to me. It's a Hal Leonard publication called "Christmas Solos for Piano: 60 Seasonal Favorites," and the copyright dates on the music range from 1993 to 1997. Once again, I can find no credit given to the arranger(s), which is a pity, because I am amazed at the genius of these people who can, with a minimum of notes, create such beautiful, accessible music.


Anyway, as I was playing through this book, my daughter requested this one:

What Child Is This?

Then, it occurred to me that it might make a nice program to collect and present some of the lullaby-ish pieces. So, I made a little "boxnet recital" out of them as a Christmas present to family and friends. If you are interested in listening, please be my guest. Once you click on the first selection, you can check "autoplay next file" and get the tunes to play one after the other, album style. The only piece that isn't from the Hal Leonard book is "Bring A Torch Jeannette Isabella," which comes from Denis Agay's "The Joy of Christmas" (Yorktown Music Press, 1965). (I took my usual interpretive/adaptive liberties with a few of these arrangements. For example, on "The Holly and the Ivy," I tried to get the playing of the merry organ "pipe organ" effect into the final chord . But on the whole, I tried to stay very faithful to the arrangers' ideas, whoever they are, God bless 'em, every one!) These are done on the Lester spinet, tuned by Bill Bremmer to the Equal Beating Victorian Temperament III, back at A440 after it's stint at A443. I recorded these as I had time over several weeks, during which time the weather changed here and there. What I am saying is that the tuning mellowed somewhat, but still is very pleasant with its characteristic EBVT III energies.

A Christmas Lullaby boxnet folder

Merry Christmas, friends!
--Andy Strong