Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Tuner-Technicians Forum Baldwin SD6 low treble bridge

I'm referring to the section above the tenor where the bridge notching is angled rather than being perpendicular to the strings of the unison ... thus resulting in slightly (about 2mm) different speaking lengths for each string.

I've always thought it was kind of a goofball feature but OTOH, never thought it sounded particularly bad.

Anyway, I now have an SD6 in my shop. Scope of work includes removing bridge pins ... so I could re-notch if I wanted to. But....

Is there any point? Will I (or anyone else) be able to hear a difference?
(This piano will be going into a modest size lesson/small ensemble rehearsal room)

Let the comments begin!

Steinway did that for a long time on their Ds. The change was in the 1930s. I do not hear any difference between them.

Boy I sure notice a difference. One just can't get as clean a unison with the staggered lengths. And the unisons seem less stable once tuned. I notice it most with the lowest notes in the section.

Well, people can decide for themselves. 8:00 pm, May 21, Berkeley City Club.

I'm not the pro you are, but I have to wonder what Baldwin was up to with that design. Ed McMorrow writes about what I first thought - "would that admittedly minute difference in speaking length affect the ability to tune a true unison"?

Putting Ed's experience (respectfully) to the side, let's say you COULD tune true unisons successfully. So, what OTHER difference could there be in the sound? Does the 4mm difference between the lower and upper strings of a tri-chord result in a brighter sound? better projection? If you "clean up" the original design will your Baldwin still sound like a Baldwin? Trouble is, you won't know until you've made your move.

Wish I could be more helpful. You've raised an interesting question I think.

Another question to try to answer is: Why did they eventually (Steinway too) abandon the design? Because it didn't work? Because too many tuners complained? Because artists complained? Because competing sales people used it against them? Because the only guy in the factory that could do it retired?

Any other ideas?

Pwg

I suspect it was done to fit the notches on the bridge more easily, or to make them easier to carve. It lasted 50 years on the Steinways, through the era of some of the greatest pianists in history, so it could not have made that much difference.

Actually it is more difficult to carve. When you angle the chisel to the angled speaking length, keeping the chisel away from cutting the edge of the notch is more difficult. One ends up applying a force vector not inline with the chisel path.

That could be, but really, it is unlikely anyone knows for sure. I was thinking of the way that the carver's body might be positioned.

This is the Steinway I mentioned. It sounded great at the concert tonight.

Ed is right. Anyone who has ever whittled a bridge would agree the angle is more difficult.

Thanks for your photo and comments about the S&S D.
Given that I have latitude to do what is appropriate to the venue, I'm thinking I'll leave it alone. Probably would be a different story if bridge/soundboard replacement were in the specified scope of work.

So guess what I tuned today! A 1923 Baldwin D.



Unequal string lengths!

Here are some more details of the plate and strings. Notice the removable strut, going to the center of the tenor section. That is like some of the very early Steinway Ds.





Not the same as the Steinway D, though. The bass strings are 8, 6, and 6, not 8, 5, and 7.

Robert Estrin posted a video this week of a Baldwin model SD concert grand he has for sale from the 1930's. I noticed it has the same removable strut (like a Steinway D), and unequal string lengths. The hitch-pin arrangement on the plate seems interesting. Is that due to the "unequal" string lengths? It sounds like a lovely piano in the video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qU2qjQWJ_jU

Here's my 1937 SD with original bridge design



And my 1966 SD6 with the "fix"



The '37 has the strut



The '66 does not

Do you notice any differences in the sound that could be attributed to the changes in design?

No. Too many design changes with the rebuild. The string terminations are completely different at both ends - front and rear duplexes eliminated. The capo bar was so trashed that it was ground down and a steel rod was inserted. The soundboard was redesigned.

The 1966 was an extremely weak piano before the rebuild vs the 1937. I played on another '66 SD6 in the bay area several months ago and it too was very weak. Baldwin was focused on the SD10 at that point I guess.

It looks like the '66 has vertical hitch pins. I didn't think those came along until the SD10. That's interesting.

Probably vertical hitch pins were installed on the rebuild?

Yes