Pianotech

The Los Angeles PTG chapter recently hosted a seminar given to us by Mr. Ferdinand Braeu (sp?), the senior technical manager at Bosendorfer. He addressed the question of replacing one of these "reverse" actions with a conventional one. His unequivocal recommendation was "don't even think about it!"


Original Message------

CAN'T EDIT THE SUBJECT LINE .. THANK YOU LOWER LOGIC!!
ANYWAY, I INTENDED IT TO READ:

Replacing the Streicher action with conventional
... since it is Nannette Streicher (married to Stein) who was really the brains for the action. 


I've been contacted by a Bosendorfer owner who has broached the idea of replacing the original Stein action (which B-dorfer used into the 1930s) with a conventional Erard-style action. 

Obvious questions arise about damper action and hammer strike since the damper actuation was completely different also and the Stein action had the hammershanks mounted "backwards". Could there be enough room for key length and still reach the strike line on the strings? 

Is this concept completely impossible or just crazy?

Keith Akins, RPT

Piano Technologist

715/775-0022 Mon-Sat 9a-9p

Original Message------

The Los Angeles PTG chapter recently hosted a seminar given to us by Mr. Ferdinand Braeu (sp?), the senior technical manager at Bosendorfer. He addressed the question of replacing one of these "reverse" actions with a conventional one. His unequivocal recommendation was "don't even think about it!"

In my former life I attempted to convert an 1881 Boesendorfer concert grand from the Viennese to modern, double-repetition action. I actually made all the incisions to make this work, not the least of which was creating a steel flange for the significantly thinned down pinblock to prevent the whole thing from disintegrating. I made a complete new stretcher, pinblock, and shelf, mortised those in the sides, and epoxied/screwed them together. I renegineered the entire key frame, thinning it and mounting a complete Mason & Hamlin-style top stack on it, new rails, brackets, and all. It even had a nice action ratio, but what got me was that the bass hammers needed to be taller than I took into account in my calculations, and they didn't fit under the new (thinner) pinblock. 

Before I ever got to the action, I found out why the project was not a good idea. The pinblock in that type of piano is of open-face type, is not supported throughout the width by a plate (there are detachable streel struts that connect to the "plate" behind the long bridge), and rotates down toward the key bed. A massive stretcher (cornice) is supposed to counter this, but the pinblock develops cracks, pulls off the stretcher and eventually fails. This was enough of a problem in pre-Centennial Steinways that they finally introduced a full-size plate.

To make a long story short, the problem is not just fitting the new action, but that the design of the whole instrument is inadequate for the string tensions it's expected to hold. I ended up junking this piano, having learned a very painful lesson.

------------------------------
Mario Igrec
http://www.pianosinsideout.com
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 03-06-2017 01:01
From: David Trasoff
Subject: Replacing Stein action with conventional???

The Los Angeles PTG chapter recently hosted a seminar given to us by Mr. Ferdinand Braeu (sp?), the senior technical manager at Bosendorfer. He addressed the question of replacing one of these "reverse" actions with a conventional one. His unequivocal recommendation was "don't even think about it!"