Composite vs Wooden parts - Part II

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 18 พ.ย. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 29

  • @michaelw6554
    @michaelw6554 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    This is one of the most beautiful pianos I've heard on TH-cam.

  • @eugeniustheodidactus8890
    @eugeniustheodidactus8890 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    *Piano sounds great, and it is being played wonderfully by you!*

    • @insidepianos
      @insidepianos  ปีที่แล้ว

      I loved that piano! It’s now owned by a man in AZ.

    • @zvelekva
      @zvelekva 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@insidepianos I've had the Kawai Millenium lll action for a while on a Kawai hybrid. It's slightly different to the WNG action in the sense that it doesn't use fibre composite for a key component (the hammer shank). Nonetheless, even with a wooden shank there's definitely a noticeable smoothness/speed as to how the mostly ABS carbon action performs when compared to other new all wood actions.
      Having said that I think this is to be expected and I don't think anyone reasonable would argue against these obvious benefits in consistency.
      The real question has always been: how does having a substantial piece of composite plastic inserted into the belly of the piano affect the overall sound?
      Not at all? Not significantly? Significantly?
      What's your opinion/experience regarding the effect on the resonance and overall sound of the piano?

    • @insidepianos
      @insidepianos  10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@zvelekva I wouldn't expect the "plastic-ness" of the action parts to have a noticeable effect on the, as you call it, overall sound. The action is so loosely coupled to the belly of the piano, sitting as they do above a keyframe that's only attached to the rest of the piano by gravity. The parts themselves are screwed to a rail that has internal dampening characteristics as well. Further, they're held in tension by the surrounding parts such that they would have a hard time vibrating, and even if they could their smallness would confine the vibrations to a very narrow and high frequency. Good question though: it's fun to think through it.
      The effect of the shank (wooden vs composite) on the tone of a struck string seems to be more open to debate.

    • @zvelekva
      @zvelekva 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@insidepianos I was thinking along the lines of reflections. E.g. the way the sound can drastically change if you alter the furnishings in a room.
      Sound coming into the action cavity which is adjacent to the soundboard, then bouncing around in there hitting against plastic vs bouncing around in there and hitting against wood and then exiting the instrument...Instinct tells me wood would absorb more sound vs plastic...How much of a difference would it make, what would the actual effect be, would it be noticeable to even a very discerning ear...
      The reason I'm contemplating this is because there's some manufacturers out there absolutely adamant they will not adopt this technology despite the obvious benefits. However, trying to pin them down to a concrete reason why is proving rather elusive and it's really frustrating especially when you're trying to have these parts replaced as I just have (shanks/rollers, not wippens...went with Abel).
      It probably wouldn't have cost me much more to have the carbon parts, but I simply didn't want to take a risk on a possible down side. Thus for future reference I'm comparing notes with others to try and work out what the scenarios are/whether I've made a mistake.

  • @GonzoTheRosarian
    @GonzoTheRosarian 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Oh! whoever got that Baldwin is a lucky person. It is beautiful. Thank you for the series on the WNG parts. Have you used their upright actions on an upright restoration?

  • @russd.522
    @russd.522 2 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    The piano recording sounds amazing! May I ask what equipment you’re using to record? :)

    • @insidepianos
      @insidepianos  2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Hey Russ! Knowing me I probably used my pair of AEA N8s in a blumlein pattern within the piano combined with 3 Miktek C7s in a mid/side arrangement out in the room. My preamp/converter is the Focusrite ISA828. It was just a simple matter of spending til it hurt. 😞
      Thanks for the kind words about the recording though.

  • @MrClassicalMusic1
    @MrClassicalMusic1 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Hope you upload a video soon on the restoration of your Baldwin grand.

  • @bryanpersaud9947
    @bryanpersaud9947 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Thanks for this, Ben!

  • @barberchopin96
    @barberchopin96 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Just curious, did you re-weigh off the action after installing the new parts and hammers? Sometimes the weight change is so different the the keys don't respond properly anymore. Great video!

  • @donprior9144
    @donprior9144 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Good sounding piano! My question is have you ever used sharp keys that are 1 or 2 mm shorter in height on any of your action rebuilds. Most all of the older Steinways I have ever worked on have these shorter height sharp keys compared to what many put on their pianos today. I think it makes for a better and easier piano to play. Pianotek I believe sells these type of sharp keys. Curious to hear your thoughts.,

    • @insidepianos
      @insidepianos  3 ปีที่แล้ว

      I agree with you, Don. Whenever I see those lower, seemingly broader, sharps on older Steinways and Mason and Hamlins I always feel comforted. The modern height can feel cumbersome.
      I did replace the sharps on my Chickering with an ebony Pianotek product (that I like), but I don’t recall them being shorter in height. Cool to know they exist in any case.
      Sometimes when I regulate sharps to my liking they end up being embedded slightly compared to the white keys. Within reason I feel we always have that freedom.

  • @hampshirepiano6383
    @hampshirepiano6383 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Can the hammer be removed easily if one makes some sort of mistake?

    • @zackeryhardy9504
      @zackeryhardy9504 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      They are not bad. They do make a specialized tool for doing so, but it essentially is just a WNG specific upright hammer extractor. If you already have a vertical hammer extractor it very likely can be modified to work. Because the carbon fiber shank is hollow, you cannot use a normal hammer extractor with the point without breaking the shank. But all you need to do is apply some heat with a heat gun and they pop right off.

  • @741662027
    @741662027 ปีที่แล้ว

    It's interesting to note that when a key is released, it returns to the rest position and then bounces up and down a tiny bit. I wonder if that's because the wippen is so light, or perhaps that the back rail cloth is old? Did it do that with the original action? That might feel weird to some people. Cy in VA (RPT)

    • @insidepianos
      @insidepianos  ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Good observation. I often do replace the back rail cloth but it has been long enough that I can't remember for sure. If that's not to blame the bobbling could be due to lightness of parts as you proposed but might also have to do with WNG parts having lower friction in general compared to wooden parts--less inertial resistance. None of the players mentioned that as a detraction but I certainly see your point. If I use these parts again I'll take special notice of this.
      Thanks for watching!

  • @thomasvandalen7103
    @thomasvandalen7103 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Hoi Ben did you use the PTDAE system with this composite action, or is it not possible with the composite?

    • @insidepianos
      @insidepianos  3 ปีที่แล้ว

      I did not. I don’t consider myself an expert on the Stanwood techniques but in as far as I understand them I don’t see any challenges to that approach presented by these WNG parts. Since Stanwood’s thinking was spurred in part by the weight inconsistency in wooden parts I would guess that one has a leg up by using composite parts, which are relatively more uniform. Eliminating that variable one’s focus could be placed on hammer and key lead weight.
      Even without doing these approaches, the Baldwin’s action turned out to be very even.

    • @thomasvandalen7103
      @thomasvandalen7103 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@insidepianos it makes sense that the composite is more uniform in weight. And there for easier to regulate. I have an ptdae on my grand (wooden parts) and it is really superb and responsive. But very time consuming to install. My piano is done by a tech that also finetune all of the Fazioli grands in Itally! I love your video's! The pianist with the red shirt plays very well! And your Baldwin sounds very good full for his size.

    • @insidepianos
      @insidepianos  3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Sounds like you have an excellent technician who allows you to enjoy your piano at its best!

    • @thomasvandalen7103
      @thomasvandalen7103 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@insidepianos yeah, a great tech is gold and can make your connection and feeling with the music so much more intense. Keep up the great work, you make a lot of people very happy!

    • @gcuthbertson1352
      @gcuthbertson1352 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      After reading these comments about the Stanwood PTD, I must add my comments based on my experiences. First of all, if you don't understand or employ the PTD (or other similar systems), you are not maximizing the potential of a piano action.
      Wood actions in particular are very prone to touch weight problems, mainly due to a wide variation in friction across the hammer flanges and even the repetition flanges. The felt used in the flanges, along with the wood holding the felt will change during humidity fluctuations, and thus friction will never be even across the keyboard, nor stable through the seasons of the year.
      WNG parts do not have any of these issues, and thus friction is as low as possible, and stable across the seasons. But that is only half of the whole issue.
      Whenever a set of hammers are installed, there is absolutely no way that the strike weight is a smooth line across the keyboard. I have weighed at least a dozen sets of hammers and they all produce very jagged lines when the results are entered into my spreadsheet and graphed. It is important to know that every gram added/subtracted to a hammer will change the down weight of the key by 5-6 grams (depending on the overall action ratio). That is a lot, and thus even 0.5 grams will still change the down weight by 2-3 grams. So even if the action is as friction free as possible and perfectly regulated, the variances in Strike Weight will make the Down Weight of the keys uneven.
      With the PTD, the hammer strike weight is adjusted by either removing or adding weight to the hammers, usually within the 0.5 gram tolerances. Sometimes up to 1 gram but that should be avoided as much as possible, especially in the upper treble hammers. The way that is done is to first record the original Strike Weight values and plot the graph. Then plot a smooth line thought those results and adjust the hammers accordingly. Keep the variances within +/- 0.5 grams if possible. While it doesn't seem like much, it doesn't take much to make a difference on the other end of the keys.
      Then with the Stanwood formula, the Front Weight of the keys can be adjusted to match the calculated weight based on the smooth Strike Weight. You would be astounded how jagged the Front Weight of the keys are as "balanced" in the factories. I've seen some horrible results that I adjust after the preliminary work is done. Like the Strike Weight curve, the Front Weight Curve should be smooth to follow it, and all tolerances are adjusted to 0.1 grams.
      I often will remove up to half of the key leads after repositioning them where they should be to match the calculated Front Weight. Once all the work is done, the level of smoothness and even response is incredible, and makes all other pianos feel crude.
      BTW, the reason factories do such a terrible job is that neither the Hammer Strike Weight, nor flange friction, and usually both are not remedied before balancing an action. Thus the leads inserted into the keys are merely "compensating" for the random Strike Weight and total key friction to give the desired Down Weight of around 52-55 grams.
      In contrast, the PTD deals with ALL the variables and guides the technician accordingly in his work. The WNG parts simply makes the task much easier and more precise as the friction issues are largely minimized. That said, ALL actions need the PTD to perform their best, and all the more with wooden actions. In fact, if the budget does not permit replacing the original parts, which can cost up to $4000 collectively (shanks, repetitions, back checks, WNG capstans, hammers etc), the next most important thing that should be done is have the action correctly balanced with the PTD protocols.
      So to answer the question, PTD is for ALL actions, wood and composite alike. It's a half job if this is not used, and while excellent results can be obtained in the traditional method (by sheer dumb luck!!!), the best results demand PTD.

  • @carlocondoluci574
    @carlocondoluci574 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    again, you are so good!!! But a question arise in my old fashioned italian brains, if i may: why not change the flanges rather than the whole whippen? Were you intrigued by the idea of changing the knucle position?Best wishes!!!

    • @insidepianos
      @insidepianos  3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Hi Carlo! When we discovered the first set of whippens weren’t a fit it was easier to send those back and receive one that only needed heels glued. That’s a lot easier than repinning flanges.
      I haven’t yet moved any knuckles around but I think it’s great to have that flexibility. It’s reversible too which is nice!
      Thanks for watching!

    • @carlocondoluci574
      @carlocondoluci574 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@insidepianos Hi Ben thankyou for your answer..you are right. It must be easier . It is a pleasure to watch your videos. My best wishes for now.