Pianotech

Decades ago, when my school acquired a few dozen Yamahas, the manufacturer recommended using Roslau wire for string replacement, stating that it was closer in characteristics to the treble wire that Yamaha uses (or used at that time, anyway). I have followed their advice and used Roslau for individual treble wire replacement, although I don't know if one or the other (or both) wires have changed in any way since then.

I am considering restringing a Yamaha with Mapes Gold instead of the Roslau that I have used thus far. If you have done this before, I would be interested in your take on the results. Roslau is nice for restringing in as much as it seems to be more malleable than some other common wires, and the tunings tend to stabilize a bit faster. But if better sound is to be had (or even a different, but also desirable sound), I'm certainly willing to work harder for it.

Thanks,

------------------------------
Alan Eder, RPT
Herb Alpert School of Music
California Institute of the Arts
Valencia, CA
661.904.6483
------------------------------

You can become an ignored reference 
like the rest of us, if you aren't already.
Ron N

I believe that I have enjoyed the distinction of being an ignored reference for many a decade now!

Re: the wire...

Concerning the metric/inch substitution, I am using 'mur'cun size 13 for metric 13.5, 13.5 for 14, etc. Does this approach still yield the few pounds of tension change you mentioned? Less? Not at all?

Thanks,

------------------------------
Alan Eder, RPT
Herb Alpert School of Music
California Institute of the Arts
Valencia, CA
661.904.6483
------------------------------


Original Message:
Sent: 09-03-2015 13:08
From: Ronald Nossaman
Subject: Mapes Gold wire for Yamaha restring?

Alan,
I know of no characteristic difference in sound, but hairs can always be
split finer when you're in the land of subjectivity. There will be a
couple of pounds difference in tension per string resulting from
metric/inch substitution, but whether it sounds different will likely
depend on the RH% as much as anything. IG is reported to be slightly
higher in tensile strength, and it's very clean to work with. That's why
I use it. Since you have a bunch of similar pianos, you have a potential
opportunity most of us never get. If you can string one with Roslau, and
one with Mapes IG and get a direct side by side heads up comparison, you
can hear for yourself if there is a detectable difference. There are so
many "I heard" stories about wire choice (and everything else imaginable
and imagined) that a story of known origin would be very welcome. But
then there's the hammers...

Make a Journal article about it. You can become an ignored reference
like the rest of us, if you aren't already.
Ron N

Ed,

It was Andy.  He clearly told me they were packaging coils off of large spools they recieve as an end user and not a wire mill. Clearly communicated or not, it always possible that I misunderstood the communication, so maybe I got that wrong, but I don't think so. The lack of lab tested BP% data supports, in my view, the end user/distributor scenario.    

------------------------------
Jim Ialeggio
grandpianosolutions.com
Shirley, MA
978 425-9026
------------------------------

Since I seemed to have niggled-the-fabooney and bruised the gezoo with my impressions on my adventures with Mapes IG, I decided to go back to my wire stash which has not been chucked yet. Did I overstate the assertion that an entire set was defective?

First define defective:

For my purposes, right now, fully aware this definition, or in fact any definition will not receive universal endorsement, my definition is one where internal stress is induced either by small coil packaging  equipment, or internal stresses created during the various heating/cooling/sizing processes of drawing the string to size. This evidenced by wires, which when carefully uncoiled from outside the roll (or inside carefully), exhibit a pronounced compound curve which does not resolve itself after sitting uncoiled for an extended period of time. These are wires that fight all the way going into the piano.

There are other factors that can be called defective, but my wire only exhibited this symptom.

Why do I consider it a defect?

I had a treble falseness problem 69-76-ish depending on the piano, that would not resolve itself, despite anal attention to processes, and equipment, and multiple changes and adjustments to those processes and equipment. The bridge work was excellent, but I questioned my work big time in trying to nail this falseness issue...falseness defined as classic self-beating, plus a second annoying, faster, lower amplitude falseness characterized by excessive movement in the unison and individual strings . This second falseness did not cross the threshold of obvious self-beating falseness, but remained perplexingly non-front duplex noisy. By the way most of the worst of these noisy trebles were short duplexes aka Ron N’s preference. I say this to emphasize that the noise was falseness and not duplex noise.   Bridge work was redone in trying to locate this falseness, the same wire being installed or new Mapes IG installed. There was never any resolution to the falseness at all. This was all a huge, frustrating, time wasting exercise, which yielded zero improvement. Worse, it yielded no perspective that might resolve the issue in future rebuilds...very very frustrating to say the least. I mention this because this frustration is what drove the "impressions"  I posted previously.

The only aspect of this problem I had not considered was the wire. Only small linear quantities of treble wire per gauge are used in any piano. This means I was taking all these trebles off the same coils for the last 8 years.

I just went back over my files to locate the region that had the most pronounced falseness. The worst area was #69-76-ish…fairly standard falseness region, but one which should yield to anal attention to terminations. However it didn’t yield.

I then went back over my files of the scales I had used in these rebuilds, to locate if there was a particular relationship between  gauges and troubled regions in the treble. The goal then to check through all the wire to see which coils exhibited the defect as I labeled it.

The files indicated #14 predominantly with perhaps some #14-1/2. I then went through the entire stash, #13-18.

Turns out I did seriously overstate the assertion of “ entire set defective” according to my definition of “defective”. My apologies to Mapes on this point. Chaulk-it-up to time wasted frustration. It was only the #14, which comes off the coil with a twisted mind of its own...a single bad coil… a pretty large overstatement, fueled by major frustration…but no doubt, my bad on this point. I apologize.

Fine…So in the process of working this problem and frustration a couple of months ago, in chatting up Andy at Mapes, I was dismayed at how little he actually seemed to know about the substance he was selling. If you are selling premium wire, wouldn’t it be reasonable to expect the supplier to be able to tick off physical properties that make the wire the premium choice they claim? It is reasonable to expect they would understand the elongation properties of the wire…but they are singular among the string winders in not knowing what the elongation of their wire is. It is reasonable to expect they would have tested the wire for BP% when BP% is a central design parameter used by string designers…but there is no data or even attempt at data on this score either, and hasn’t been for many years.

If they don’t know or will not communicate it, what exactly do we know regarding these parameters? Numerically, very little to nothing unless we test the wire ourselves. That leaves empirical experience. As Ron said, empirical experience is major in this respect. I agree with him. However, its an odd expectation to expect your customers to provide all the information that it is a supplier’s responsibility to provide, by asking us to buy their product and then prove its utility at the our own cost.

My take away from my conversations with Mapes was a strange mix of “don’t know or don’t’ even want to know” and the assertion that “ we make premium wire” . There was no attempt at justifying this assertion with information. This challenges my desire to trust their commitment to the quality. Even more off-putting is that attitude puts the responsibility on us as puny little rebuilders to prove the quality of their wire at our own expense, and in some cases our peril.

Though I overstated the defect rate of the Mapes IG wire, for which I apologize, I sense way more of a commitment to the nature and design of the product from Paullelo. They have clearly documented their piano wire performance and I see a specific commitment and respect for the viewpoint of piano rebuilders in particular. For this reason, I now have enough Paullelo to see me through to croakage.

------------------------------
Jim Ialeggio
grandpianosolutions.com
Shirley, MA
978 425-9026
------------------------------

Jim and I have had this conversation in the recent past.  I too have been fighting the falseness beast in my rebuilds. I have been devoting  lot of attention to my bridgework in an attempt to alleviate it. and continue to do so.  The falseness is most apparent in the top treble section.  And while this attention has brought about improvement, it wasn't what I had hoped for.  

Since I began using the Paulello wire, I have noticed a very considerable improvement in the false beat problem.  The unisons through most of the piano will be very, very clean.  As in pure as the driven snow unisons.  My understanding is that the Paulello wire is drawn more slowly and through more dies than other commercial wire, which may mean that fewer distortions are introduced in the process of manufacturing.  Greater care in general is taken.

The trouble areas are noticeably cleaner, but the Paulello wire has not proven to be the Holy Grail.  There still remain some false beating bugaboos.  But the wire is considerably better.

In general, I have been noticing just how false so many American made pianos are.  I certainly am noticing in recent Steinways a falseness that can be shocking in how bad it is.  I take care of a 6 year old K-52 upright that from about C-5 up gets worse and worse, as bad as the worst Whitney spinet you have tuned.  I have seen some newish grands that exhibit similar awfulness.  There can be other reasons for the falseness, of course, such as poor bridge pinning.  

Because of my aging ears, I have been tuning electronically for a few years.  That means that, most of the time, I am listening to a single string in isolation while watching the pitch move on the TuneLab screen.  I see the pitch wander a lot in the first few seconds of a note (it can be 10 cents or more) before it settles onto a pitch center.  I don't see that level of pitch movement with the Paulello wire.  

If Mapes is not drawing its own wire, who is?  I have to wonder if it is made in China, since so much else is these days.  

Will 

------------------------------
William Truitt
Bridgewater NH
603-744-2277
------------------------------


Original Message:
Sent: 09-06-2015 00:22
From: Jim Ialeggio
Subject: Mapes Gold wire for Yamaha restring?

Since I seemed to have niggled-the-fabooney and bruised the gezoo with my impressions on my adventures with Mapes IG, I decided to go back to my wire stash which has not been chucked yet. Did I overstate the assertion that an entire set was defective?

First define defective:

For my purposes, right now, fully aware this definition, or in fact any definition will not receive universal endorsement, my definition is one where internal stress is induced either by small coil packaging  equipment, or internal stresses created during the various heating/cooling/sizing processes of drawing the string to size. This evidenced by wires, which when carefully uncoiled from outside the roll (or inside carefully), exhibit a pronounced compound curve which does not resolve itself after sitting uncoiled for an extended period of time. These are wires that fight all the way going into the piano.

There are other factors that can be called defective, but my wire only exhibited this symptom.

Why do I consider it a defect?

I had a treble falseness problem 69-76-ish depending on the piano, that would not resolve itself, despite anal attention to processes, and equipment, and multiple changes and adjustments to those processes and equipment. The bridge work was excellent, but I questioned my work big time in trying to nail this falseness issue...falseness defined as classic self-beating, plus a second annoying, faster, lower amplitude falseness characterized by excessive movement in the unison and individual strings . This second falseness did not cross the threshold of obvious self-beating falseness, but remained perplexingly non-front duplex noisy. By the way most of the worst of these noisy trebles were short duplexes aka Ron N’s preference. I say this to emphasize that the noise was falseness and not duplex noise.   Bridge work was redone in trying to locate this falseness, the same wire being installed or new Mapes IG installed. There was never any resolution to the falseness at all. This was all a huge, frustrating, time wasting exercise, which yielded zero improvement. Worse, it yielded no perspective that might resolve the issue in future rebuilds...very very frustrating to say the least. I mention this because this frustration is what drove the "impressions"  I posted previously.

The only aspect of this problem I had not considered was the wire. Only small linear quantities of treble wire per gauge are used in any piano. This means I was taking all these trebles off the same coils for the last 8 years.

I just went back over my files to locate the region that had the most pronounced falseness. The worst area was #69-76-ish…fairly standard falseness region, but one which should yield to anal attention to terminations. However it didn’t yield.

I then went back over my files of the scales I had used in these rebuilds, to locate if there was a particular relationship between  gauges and troubled regions in the treble. The goal then to check through all the wire to see which coils exhibited the defect as I labeled it.

The files indicated #14 predominantly with perhaps some #14-1/2. I then went through the entire stash, #13-18.

Turns out I did seriously overstate the assertion of “ entire set defective” according to my definition of “defective”. My apologies to Mapes on this point. Chaulk-it-up to time wasted frustration. It was only the #14, which comes off the coil with a twisted mind of its own...a single bad coil… a pretty large overstatement, fueled by major frustration…but no doubt, my bad on this point. I apologize.

Fine…So in the process of working this problem and frustration a couple of months ago, in chatting up Andy at Mapes, I was dismayed at how little he actually seemed to know about the substance he was selling. If you are selling premium wire, wouldn’t it be reasonable to expect the supplier to be able to tick off physical properties that make the wire the premium choice they claim? It is reasonable to expect they would understand the elongation properties of the wire…but they are singular among the string winders in not knowing what the elongation of their wire is. It is reasonable to expect they would have tested the wire for BP% when BP% is a central design parameter used by string designers…but there is no data or even attempt at data on this score either, and hasn’t been for many years.

If they don’t know or will not communicate it, what exactly do we know regarding these parameters? Numerically, very little to nothing unless we test the wire ourselves. That leaves empirical experience. As Ron said, empirical experience is major in this respect. I agree with him. However, its an odd expectation to expect your customers to provide all the information that it is a supplier’s responsibility to provide, by asking us to buy their product and then prove its utility at the our own cost.

My take away from my conversations with Mapes was a strange mix of “don’t know or don’t’ even want to know” and the assertion that “ we make premium wire” . There was no attempt at justifying this assertion with information. This challenges my desire to trust their commitment to the quality. Even more off-putting is that attitude puts the responsibility on us as puny little rebuilders to prove the quality of their wire at our own expense, and in some cases our peril.

Though I overstated the defect rate of the Mapes IG wire, for which I apologize, I sense way more of a commitment to the nature and design of the product from Paullelo. They have clearly documented their piano wire performance and I see a specific commitment and respect for the viewpoint of piano rebuilders in particular. For this reason, I now have enough Paullelo to see me through to croakage.

------------------------------
Jim Ialeggio
grandpianosolutions.com
Shirley, MA
978 425-9026
------------------------------

Jim and Will

Are you sure the "falseness" issues aren't a symptom of making the top end of the soundboard too stiff either via the ribscale or inadequate panel thinning behind the treble bridge (or both)?

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320
------------------------------


Original Message:
Sent: 09-06-2015 06:38
From: William Truitt
Subject: Mapes Gold wire for Yamaha restring?

Jim and I have had this conversation in the recent past.  I too have been fighting the falseness beast in my rebuilds. I have been devoting  lot of attention to my bridgework in an attempt to alleviate it. and continue to do so.  The falseness is most apparent in the top treble section.  And while this attention has brought about improvement, it wasn't what I had hoped for.  

Since I began using the Paulello wire, I have noticed a very considerable improvement in the false beat problem.  The unisons through most of the piano will be very, very clean.  As in pure as the driven snow unisons.  My understanding is that the Paulello wire is drawn more slowly and through more dies than other commercial wire, which may mean that fewer distortions are introduced in the process of manufacturing.  Greater care in general is taken.

The trouble areas are noticeably cleaner, but the Paulello wire has not proven to be the Holy Grail.  There still remain some false beating bugaboos.  But the wire is considerably better.

In general, I have been noticing just how false so many American made pianos are.  I certainly am noticing in recent Steinways a falseness that can be shocking in how bad it is.  I take care of a 6 year old K-52 upright that from about C-5 up gets worse and worse, as bad as the worst Whitney spinet you have tuned.  I have seen some newish grands that exhibit similar awfulness.  There can be other reasons for the falseness, of course, such as poor bridge pinning.  

Because of my aging ears, I have been tuning electronically for a few years.  That means that, most of the time, I am listening to a single string in isolation while watching the pitch move on the TuneLab screen.  I see the pitch wander a lot in the first few seconds of a note (it can be 10 cents or more) before it settles onto a pitch center.  I don't see that level of pitch movement with the Paulello wire.  

If Mapes is not drawing its own wire, who is?  I have to wonder if it is made in China, since so much else is these days.  

Will 

------------------------------
William Truitt
Bridgewater NH
603-744-2277
------------------------------


Original Message:
Sent: 09-06-2015 00:22
From: Jim Ialeggio
Subject: Mapes Gold wire for Yamaha restring?

Since I seemed to have niggled-the-fabooney and bruised the gezoo with my impressions on my adventures with Mapes IG, I decided to go back to my wire stash which has not been chucked yet. Did I overstate the assertion that an entire set was defective?

First define defective:

For my purposes, right now, fully aware this definition, or in fact any definition will not receive universal endorsement, my definition is one where internal stress is induced either by small coil packaging  equipment, or internal stresses created during the various heating/cooling/sizing processes of drawing the string to size. This evidenced by wires, which when carefully uncoiled from outside the roll (or inside carefully), exhibit a pronounced compound curve which does not resolve itself after sitting uncoiled for an extended period of time. These are wires that fight all the way going into the piano.

There are other factors that can be called defective, but my wire only exhibited this symptom.

Why do I consider it a defect?

I had a treble falseness problem 69-76-ish depending on the piano, that would not resolve itself, despite anal attention to processes, and equipment, and multiple changes and adjustments to those processes and equipment. The bridge work was excellent, but I questioned my work big time in trying to nail this falseness issue...falseness defined as classic self-beating, plus a second annoying, faster, lower amplitude falseness characterized by excessive movement in the unison and individual strings . This second falseness did not cross the threshold of obvious self-beating falseness, but remained perplexingly non-front duplex noisy. By the way most of the worst of these noisy trebles were short duplexes aka Ron N’s preference. I say this to emphasize that the noise was falseness and not duplex noise.   Bridge work was redone in trying to locate this falseness, the same wire being installed or new Mapes IG installed. There was never any resolution to the falseness at all. This was all a huge, frustrating, time wasting exercise, which yielded zero improvement. Worse, it yielded no perspective that might resolve the issue in future rebuilds...very very frustrating to say the least. I mention this because this frustration is what drove the "impressions"  I posted previously.

The only aspect of this problem I had not considered was the wire. Only small linear quantities of treble wire per gauge are used in any piano. This means I was taking all these trebles off the same coils for the last 8 years.

I just went back over my files to locate the region that had the most pronounced falseness. The worst area was #69-76-ish…fairly standard falseness region, but one which should yield to anal attention to terminations. However it didn’t yield.

I then went back over my files of the scales I had used in these rebuilds, to locate if there was a particular relationship between  gauges and troubled regions in the treble. The goal then to check through all the wire to see which coils exhibited the defect as I labeled it.

The files indicated #14 predominantly with perhaps some #14-1/2. I then went through the entire stash, #13-18.

Turns out I did seriously overstate the assertion of “ entire set defective” according to my definition of “defective”. My apologies to Mapes on this point. Chaulk-it-up to time wasted frustration. It was only the #14, which comes off the coil with a twisted mind of its own...a single bad coil… a pretty large overstatement, fueled by major frustration…but no doubt, my bad on this point. I apologize.

Fine…So in the process of working this problem and frustration a couple of months ago, in chatting up Andy at Mapes, I was dismayed at how little he actually seemed to know about the substance he was selling. If you are selling premium wire, wouldn’t it be reasonable to expect the supplier to be able to tick off physical properties that make the wire the premium choice they claim? It is reasonable to expect they would understand the elongation properties of the wire…but they are singular among the string winders in not knowing what the elongation of their wire is. It is reasonable to expect they would have tested the wire for BP% when BP% is a central design parameter used by string designers…but there is no data or even attempt at data on this score either, and hasn’t been for many years.

If they don’t know or will not communicate it, what exactly do we know regarding these parameters? Numerically, very little to nothing unless we test the wire ourselves. That leaves empirical experience. As Ron said, empirical experience is major in this respect. I agree with him. However, its an odd expectation to expect your customers to provide all the information that it is a supplier’s responsibility to provide, by asking us to buy their product and then prove its utility at the our own cost.

My take away from my conversations with Mapes was a strange mix of “don’t know or don’t’ even want to know” and the assertion that “ we make premium wire” . There was no attempt at justifying this assertion with information. This challenges my desire to trust their commitment to the quality. Even more off-putting is that attitude puts the responsibility on us as puny little rebuilders to prove the quality of their wire at our own expense, and in some cases our peril.

Though I overstated the defect rate of the Mapes IG wire, for which I apologize, I sense way more of a commitment to the nature and design of the product from Paullelo. They have clearly documented their piano wire performance and I see a specific commitment and respect for the viewpoint of piano rebuilders in particular. For this reason, I now have enough Paullelo to see me through to croakage.

------------------------------
Jim Ialeggio
grandpianosolutions.com
Shirley, MA
978 425-9026
------------------------------

David:

No, I am not sure.  But that is not something I have considered either.  Can you explain the possible relationship of falseness to panel/rib stiffness?  

Will 

------------------------------
William Truitt
Bridgewater NH
603-744-2277
------------------------------


Original Message:
Sent: 09-06-2015 09:43
From: David Love
Subject: Mapes Gold wire for Yamaha restring?

Jim and Will

Are you sure the "falseness" issues aren't a symptom of making the top end of the soundboard too stiff either via the ribscale or inadequate panel thinning behind the treble bridge (or both)?

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320
------------------------------


Original Message:
Sent: 09-06-2015 06:38
From: William Truitt
Subject: Mapes Gold wire for Yamaha restring?

Jim and I have had this conversation in the recent past.  I too have been fighting the falseness beast in my rebuilds. I have been devoting  lot of attention to my bridgework in an attempt to alleviate it. and continue to do so.  The falseness is most apparent in the top treble section.  And while this attention has brought about improvement, it wasn't what I had hoped for.  

Since I began using the Paulello wire, I have noticed a very considerable improvement in the false beat problem.  The unisons through most of the piano will be very, very clean.  As in pure as the driven snow unisons.  My understanding is that the Paulello wire is drawn more slowly and through more dies than other commercial wire, which may mean that fewer distortions are introduced in the process of manufacturing.  Greater care in general is taken.

The trouble areas are noticeably cleaner, but the Paulello wire has not proven to be the Holy Grail.  There still remain some false beating bugaboos.  But the wire is considerably better.

In general, I have been noticing just how false so many American made pianos are.  I certainly am noticing in recent Steinways a falseness that can be shocking in how bad it is.  I take care of a 6 year old K-52 upright that from about C-5 up gets worse and worse, as bad as the worst Whitney spinet you have tuned.  I have seen some newish grands that exhibit similar awfulness.  There can be other reasons for the falseness, of course, such as poor bridge pinning.  

Because of my aging ears, I have been tuning electronically for a few years.  That means that, most of the time, I am listening to a single string in isolation while watching the pitch move on the TuneLab screen.  I see the pitch wander a lot in the first few seconds of a note (it can be 10 cents or more) before it settles onto a pitch center.  I don't see that level of pitch movement with the Paulello wire.  

If Mapes is not drawing its own wire, who is?  I have to wonder if it is made in China, since so much else is these days.  

Will 

------------------------------
William Truitt
Bridgewater NH
603-744-2277
------------------------------


Original Message:
Sent: 09-06-2015 00:22
From: Jim Ialeggio
Subject: Mapes Gold wire for Yamaha restring?

Since I seemed to have niggled-the-fabooney and bruised the gezoo with my impressions on my adventures with Mapes IG, I decided to go back to my wire stash which has not been chucked yet. Did I overstate the assertion that an entire set was defective?

First define defective:

For my purposes, right now, fully aware this definition, or in fact any definition will not receive universal endorsement, my definition is one where internal stress is induced either by small coil packaging  equipment, or internal stresses created during the various heating/cooling/sizing processes of drawing the string to size. This evidenced by wires, which when carefully uncoiled from outside the roll (or inside carefully), exhibit a pronounced compound curve which does not resolve itself after sitting uncoiled for an extended period of time. These are wires that fight all the way going into the piano.

There are other factors that can be called defective, but my wire only exhibited this symptom.

Why do I consider it a defect?

I had a treble falseness problem 69-76-ish depending on the piano, that would not resolve itself, despite anal attention to processes, and equipment, and multiple changes and adjustments to those processes and equipment. The bridge work was excellent, but I questioned my work big time in trying to nail this falseness issue...falseness defined as classic self-beating, plus a second annoying, faster, lower amplitude falseness characterized by excessive movement in the unison and individual strings . This second falseness did not cross the threshold of obvious self-beating falseness, but remained perplexingly non-front duplex noisy. By the way most of the worst of these noisy trebles were short duplexes aka Ron N’s preference. I say this to emphasize that the noise was falseness and not duplex noise.   Bridge work was redone in trying to locate this falseness, the same wire being installed or new Mapes IG installed. There was never any resolution to the falseness at all. This was all a huge, frustrating, time wasting exercise, which yielded zero improvement. Worse, it yielded no perspective that might resolve the issue in future rebuilds...very very frustrating to say the least. I mention this because this frustration is what drove the "impressions"  I posted previously.

The only aspect of this problem I had not considered was the wire. Only small linear quantities of treble wire per gauge are used in any piano. This means I was taking all these trebles off the same coils for the last 8 years.

I just went back over my files to locate the region that had the most pronounced falseness. The worst area was #69-76-ish…fairly standard falseness region, but one which should yield to anal attention to terminations. However it didn’t yield.

I then went back over my files of the scales I had used in these rebuilds, to locate if there was a particular relationship between  gauges and troubled regions in the treble. The goal then to check through all the wire to see which coils exhibited the defect as I labeled it.

The files indicated #14 predominantly with perhaps some #14-1/2. I then went through the entire stash, #13-18.

Turns out I did seriously overstate the assertion of “ entire set defective” according to my definition of “defective”. My apologies to Mapes on this point. Chaulk-it-up to time wasted frustration. It was only the #14, which comes off the coil with a twisted mind of its own...a single bad coil… a pretty large overstatement, fueled by major frustration…but no doubt, my bad on this point. I apologize.

Fine…So in the process of working this problem and frustration a couple of months ago, in chatting up Andy at Mapes, I was dismayed at how little he actually seemed to know about the substance he was selling. If you are selling premium wire, wouldn’t it be reasonable to expect the supplier to be able to tick off physical properties that make the wire the premium choice they claim? It is reasonable to expect they would understand the elongation properties of the wire…but they are singular among the string winders in not knowing what the elongation of their wire is. It is reasonable to expect they would have tested the wire for BP% when BP% is a central design parameter used by string designers…but there is no data or even attempt at data on this score either, and hasn’t been for many years.

If they don’t know or will not communicate it, what exactly do we know regarding these parameters? Numerically, very little to nothing unless we test the wire ourselves. That leaves empirical experience. As Ron said, empirical experience is major in this respect. I agree with him. However, its an odd expectation to expect your customers to provide all the information that it is a supplier’s responsibility to provide, by asking us to buy their product and then prove its utility at the our own cost.

My take away from my conversations with Mapes was a strange mix of “don’t know or don’t’ even want to know” and the assertion that “ we make premium wire” . There was no attempt at justifying this assertion with information. This challenges my desire to trust their commitment to the quality. Even more off-putting is that attitude puts the responsibility on us as puny little rebuilders to prove the quality of their wire at our own expense, and in some cases our peril.

Though I overstated the defect rate of the Mapes IG wire, for which I apologize, I sense way more of a commitment to the nature and design of the product from Paullelo. They have clearly documented their piano wire performance and I see a specific commitment and respect for the viewpoint of piano rebuilders in particular. For this reason, I now have enough Paullelo to see me through to croakage.

------------------------------
Jim Ialeggio
grandpianosolutions.com
Shirley, MA
978 425-9026
------------------------------

Well I put falseness in quotes because I'm not sure what falseness is exactly. Making the panel too stiff in the treble can create unwanted noise, sometimes from the front duplex and sometimes, it appears, from the inability of the string to dump its energy into the board fast enough. 

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320
------------------------------


Original Message:
Sent: 09-06-2015 20:20
From: William Truitt
Subject: Mapes Gold wire for Yamaha restring?

David:

No, I am not sure.  But that is not something I have considered either.  Can you explain the possible relationship of falseness to panel/rib stiffness?  

Will 

------------------------------
William Truitt
Bridgewater NH
603-744-2277
------------------------------


Original Message:
Sent: 09-06-2015 09:43
From: David Love
Subject: Mapes Gold wire for Yamaha restring?

Jim and Will

Are you sure the "falseness" issues aren't a symptom of making the top end of the soundboard too stiff either via the ribscale or inadequate panel thinning behind the treble bridge (or both)?

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320
------------------------------


Original Message:
Sent: 09-06-2015 06:38
From: William Truitt
Subject: Mapes Gold wire for Yamaha restring?

Jim and I have had this conversation in the recent past.  I too have been fighting the falseness beast in my rebuilds. I have been devoting  lot of attention to my bridgework in an attempt to alleviate it. and continue to do so.  The falseness is most apparent in the top treble section.  And while this attention has brought about improvement, it wasn't what I had hoped for.  

Since I began using the Paulello wire, I have noticed a very considerable improvement in the false beat problem.  The unisons through most of the piano will be very, very clean.  As in pure as the driven snow unisons.  My understanding is that the Paulello wire is drawn more slowly and through more dies than other commercial wire, which may mean that fewer distortions are introduced in the process of manufacturing.  Greater care in general is taken.

The trouble areas are noticeably cleaner, but the Paulello wire has not proven to be the Holy Grail.  There still remain some false beating bugaboos.  But the wire is considerably better.

In general, I have been noticing just how false so many American made pianos are.  I certainly am noticing in recent Steinways a falseness that can be shocking in how bad it is.  I take care of a 6 year old K-52 upright that from about C-5 up gets worse and worse, as bad as the worst Whitney spinet you have tuned.  I have seen some newish grands that exhibit similar awfulness.  There can be other reasons for the falseness, of course, such as poor bridge pinning.  

Because of my aging ears, I have been tuning electronically for a few years.  That means that, most of the time, I am listening to a single string in isolation while watching the pitch move on the TuneLab screen.  I see the pitch wander a lot in the first few seconds of a note (it can be 10 cents or more) before it settles onto a pitch center.  I don't see that level of pitch movement with the Paulello wire.  

If Mapes is not drawing its own wire, who is?  I have to wonder if it is made in China, since so much else is these days.  

Will 

------------------------------
William Truitt
Bridgewater NH
603-744-2277
------------------------------


Original Message:
Sent: 09-06-2015 00:22
From: Jim Ialeggio
Subject: Mapes Gold wire for Yamaha restring?

Since I seemed to have niggled-the-fabooney and bruised the gezoo with my impressions on my adventures with Mapes IG, I decided to go back to my wire stash which has not been chucked yet. Did I overstate the assertion that an entire set was defective?

First define defective:

For my purposes, right now, fully aware this definition, or in fact any definition will not receive universal endorsement, my definition is one where internal stress is induced either by small coil packaging  equipment, or internal stresses created during the various heating/cooling/sizing processes of drawing the string to size. This evidenced by wires, which when carefully uncoiled from outside the roll (or inside carefully), exhibit a pronounced compound curve which does not resolve itself after sitting uncoiled for an extended period of time. These are wires that fight all the way going into the piano.

There are other factors that can be called defective, but my wire only exhibited this symptom.

Why do I consider it a defect?

I had a treble falseness problem 69-76-ish depending on the piano, that would not resolve itself, despite anal attention to processes, and equipment, and multiple changes and adjustments to those processes and equipment. The bridge work was excellent, but I questioned my work big time in trying to nail this falseness issue...falseness defined as classic self-beating, plus a second annoying, faster, lower amplitude falseness characterized by excessive movement in the unison and individual strings . This second falseness did not cross the threshold of obvious self-beating falseness, but remained perplexingly non-front duplex noisy. By the way most of the worst of these noisy trebles were short duplexes aka Ron N’s preference. I say this to emphasize that the noise was falseness and not duplex noise.   Bridge work was redone in trying to locate this falseness, the same wire being installed or new Mapes IG installed. There was never any resolution to the falseness at all. This was all a huge, frustrating, time wasting exercise, which yielded zero improvement. Worse, it yielded no perspective that might resolve the issue in future rebuilds...very very frustrating to say the least. I mention this because this frustration is what drove the "impressions"  I posted previously.

The only aspect of this problem I had not considered was the wire. Only small linear quantities of treble wire per gauge are used in any piano. This means I was taking all these trebles off the same coils for the last 8 years.

I just went back over my files to locate the region that had the most pronounced falseness. The worst area was #69-76-ish…fairly standard falseness region, but one which should yield to anal attention to terminations. However it didn’t yield.

I then went back over my files of the scales I had used in these rebuilds, to locate if there was a particular relationship between  gauges and troubled regions in the treble. The goal then to check through all the wire to see which coils exhibited the defect as I labeled it.

The files indicated #14 predominantly with perhaps some #14-1/2. I then went through the entire stash, #13-18.

Turns out I did seriously overstate the assertion of “ entire set defective” according to my definition of “defective”. My apologies to Mapes on this point. Chaulk-it-up to time wasted frustration. It was only the #14, which comes off the coil with a twisted mind of its own...a single bad coil… a pretty large overstatement, fueled by major frustration…but no doubt, my bad on this point. I apologize.

Fine…So in the process of working this problem and frustration a couple of months ago, in chatting up Andy at Mapes, I was dismayed at how little he actually seemed to know about the substance he was selling. If you are selling premium wire, wouldn’t it be reasonable to expect the supplier to be able to tick off physical properties that make the wire the premium choice they claim? It is reasonable to expect they would understand the elongation properties of the wire…but they are singular among the string winders in not knowing what the elongation of their wire is. It is reasonable to expect they would have tested the wire for BP% when BP% is a central design parameter used by string designers…but there is no data or even attempt at data on this score either, and hasn’t been for many years.

If they don’t know or will not communicate it, what exactly do we know regarding these parameters? Numerically, very little to nothing unless we test the wire ourselves. That leaves empirical experience. As Ron said, empirical experience is major in this respect. I agree with him. However, its an odd expectation to expect your customers to provide all the information that it is a supplier’s responsibility to provide, by asking us to buy their product and then prove its utility at the our own cost.

My take away from my conversations with Mapes was a strange mix of “don’t know or don’t’ even want to know” and the assertion that “ we make premium wire” . There was no attempt at justifying this assertion with information. This challenges my desire to trust their commitment to the quality. Even more off-putting is that attitude puts the responsibility on us as puny little rebuilders to prove the quality of their wire at our own expense, and in some cases our peril.

Though I overstated the defect rate of the Mapes IG wire, for which I apologize, I sense way more of a commitment to the nature and design of the product from Paullelo. They have clearly documented their piano wire performance and I see a specific commitment and respect for the viewpoint of piano rebuilders in particular. For this reason, I now have enough Paullelo to see me through to croakage.

------------------------------
Jim Ialeggio
grandpianosolutions.com
Shirley, MA
978 425-9026
------------------------------

Jim,

I think you are wrong about Mapes not drawing their own piano wire. At least they have told me they draw it.

Have you talked to Andy Wilson?

The crude pitch comparison breakage tests I have done show Mapes IG as strong as Paulello XM, which is their strongest.

------------------------------
Edward McMorrow
Edmonds WA
425-299-3431

My recent adventures with discovering my entire set of Mapes IG to be defective, colors my opinion about the wire. Not that all their wire is defective, because it clearly isn't. But, that the conversation I had with Mapes, though congenial left me with these impressions which are a real turn-off for me (these are impressions):

1-I was under the impression that they produced their own wire. THis does not seem to be the case from my conversation. They seem to be end users packaging the product supplied to them under some agreement with some one or other...not clear whom.

2-the folks I talked to at Mapes were definitely not conversant in the metallurgy designed into their product. Its not clear to me at all who spec'd the composition of the wire. In the sales copy I was under the impression Mapes had something clearly in mind with their wire...maybe, maybe not...not clear from my conversations with them. And...if there was some mind behind the presumed spec'ing of the wire, was he an outside consultant or retired employee who has disappeared into the mist of remembered past or whatever...not clear

3-there is a reason no one has been able to get break point numbers out of Mapes...my take is...because they have no clue...they have not tested it...they are merely packaging the product.

These impressions are the reason I replaced my entire set of plain wire with Paullelo wires. With the Paullelo, the metallurgy and thinking behind the wire is transparent, BP% tested and published, and there are choices of tensile strength. With this kind of thinking and commitment to the design of the product,  I choose to support this business with my purchase. Surprisingly, since I was either going to go with Mapes' 5lb rolls or Paullelo's 2kg (just under 5llbs) I found the 2kg rolls actually less expensive than Mapes IG especially with the advantageous $ conversion. Paullelo is metric.

 
------------------------------
Jim Ialeggio
grandpianosolutions.com
Shirley, MA
978 425-9026
------------------------------

My recent adventures with discovering my entire set of Mapes IG to be defective, colors my opinion about the wire. Not that all their wire is defective, because it clearly isn't. But, that the conversation I had with Mapes, though congenial left me with these impressions which are a real turn-off for me (these are impressions):

1-I was under the impression that they produced their own wire. THis does not seem to be the case from my conversation. They seem to be end users packaging the product supplied to them under some agreement with some one or other...not clear whom.

2-the folks I talked to at Mapes were definitely not conversant in the metallurgy designed into their product. Its not clear to me at all who spec'd the composition of the wire. In the sales copy I was under the impression Mapes had something clearly in mind with their wire...maybe, maybe not...not clear from my conversations with them. And...if there was some mind behind the presumed spec'ing of the wire, was he an outside consultant or retired employee who has disappeared into the mist of remembered past or whatever...not clear

3-there is a reason no one has been able to get break point numbers out of Mapes...my take is...because they have no clue...they have not tested it...they are merely packaging the product.

These impressions are the reason I replaced my entire set of plain wire with Paullelo wires. With the Paullelo, the metallurgy and thinking behind the wire is transparent, BP% tested and published, and there are choices of tensile strength. With this kind of thinking and commitment to the design of the product,  I choose to support this business with my purchase. Surprisingly, since I was either going to go with Mapes' 5lb rolls or Paullelo's 2kg (just under 5llbs) I found the 2kg rolls actually less expensive than Mapes IG especially with the advantageous $ conversion. Paullelo is metric.

 
------------------------------
Jim Ialeggio
grandpianosolutions.com
Shirley, MA
978 425-9026
------------------------------

Mr. Ialeggio -

I think you have made a valid conclusion based on your logical approach, first-hand conversation, and reasonable expectations. I find that the two responses you received did little to discount your claims. The counter argument "It has never happened to me, therefore I do not believe it happened to you," is intellectually offensive. I also cannot understand why someone who does not care "either way" about the outcome of your inquiry would even enter the discussion. Clearly product integrity is an important feature of our trade. Transparency causes no honest actor any inconvenience. Quality control reports are commonplace among discriminating manufacturers. The U.S. Supreme Court undermined the American consumer's ability to learn the true manufacturing source of imported products. (See: Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc.)

There is merit in challenging the assertions of any manufacturer or distributor. It is no defense to offer that "I think you are wrong" or to rely on past experience as an accurate predictor of future performance. So as to the first point of order, every recipient of your letter should thank you for your efforts. Since Paullelo wire meets your satisfaction in transparency and price, and because you have received challenges (weak as they are) to your assertions, I suggest that you contact Mapes again, in writing, and ask for a written response to your questions. Then please report again to this group so there can be no doubt as to the validity of your claims.

------------------------------
Kent Moore
Lewisville TX
972-462-9590
------------------------------


Original Message:
Sent: 09-04-2015 08:43
From: Jim Ialeggio
Subject: Mapes Gold wire for Yamaha restring?

My recent adventures with discovering my entire set of Mapes IG to be defective, colors my opinion about the wire. Not that all their wire is defective, because it clearly isn't. But, that the conversation I had with Mapes, though congenial left me with these impressions which are a real turn-off for me (these are impressions):

1-I was under the impression that they produced their own wire. THis does not seem to be the case from my conversation. They seem to be end users packaging the product supplied to them under some agreement with some one or other...not clear whom.

2-the folks I talked to at Mapes were definitely not conversant in the metallurgy designed into their product. Its not clear to me at all who spec'd the composition of the wire. In the sales copy I was under the impression Mapes had something clearly in mind with their wire...maybe, maybe not...not clear from my conversations with them. And...if there was some mind behind the presumed spec'ing of the wire, was he an outside consultant or retired employee who has disappeared into the mist of remembered past or whatever...not clear

3-there is a reason no one has been able to get break point numbers out of Mapes...my take is...because they have no clue...they have not tested it...they are merely packaging the product.

These impressions are the reason I replaced my entire set of plain wire with Paullelo wires. With the Paullelo, the metallurgy and thinking behind the wire is transparent, BP% tested and published, and there are choices of tensile strength. With this kind of thinking and commitment to the design of the product,  I choose to support this business with my purchase. Surprisingly, since I was either going to go with Mapes' 5lb rolls or Paullelo's 2kg (just under 5llbs) I found the 2kg rolls actually less expensive than Mapes IG especially with the advantageous $ conversion. Paullelo is metric.

 
------------------------------
Jim Ialeggio
grandpianosolutions.com
Shirley, MA
978 425-9026
------------------------------

------------------------------
Edward McMorrow
Edmonds WA
425-299-3431
------------------------------

I got a response from Andy Wilson at Mapes this morning. "Yes we do draw our own wire".