This is a circumstance where the use of Paulello XM wire is appropriate. It is Paulello's strongest wire and will lower the breaking percentage to a safer level, and it will sound better because the wire is not so stressed. Use it for that top section of 12.5 gauge wire, and perhaps the section of 13 gauge wire. If you are restringing, bottom four notes type 1, followed by type 0 most of the way up the scale, some notes of type M, then the XM. Where the transitions occur will need to be calculated in a spreadsheet set up for Paulello wire.
Scaling along these lines works particularly well for smaller Steinway grands, such as the M, O, L, and A scales. I have varied the transition point of O to M quite a bit as I have learned the virtues of the wire over time. If this were an M or an O, I might carry the O type as high as note 82. In the lower part of the plain wire scale, the breaking percentage is often too low to have the best tone, so raising the BP is a virtue and still within safe limits. Above that, there is a zone where the choice of O or M is an aesthetic one, as either will be suitable.
In the bass, I would significantly lower the core wire size in the monochords and even lower the wrap size, depending on what the piano asks for. I would use type O wire for most or all of the monochords. In the bottom half of the monochords, the breaking percentages are too low by a wide margin. so manipulation of the core and wrap sizes along with type O produce significant tonal benefit. Smaller pianos like the S will greatly benefit from wraps made of nickel plated bronze in the monochords and nickel plated iron for the bichords. If you are putting in a new board, a bass corner float and vertical hitch pins in the bass that will lengthen the effective back scale.
I am finishing up the voicing on an O with a new board by Jude Reveley (old growth red spruce) with most of what is detailed above. The bass has growl up to about C2 and a sound that is different from copper wraps. It is a darker, warmer sound with a well defined pitch center. It has become a truly lovely piano, and is definitely not your plain vanilla Steinway sound. A step away from the Steinway tonal monoculture.
------------------------------
William Truitt
Bridgewater NH
603-744-2277
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 09-05-2021 22:07
From: David Love
Subject: Steinway S #88 Speaking length
The S is notoriously inconsistent at #88 ranging from 50 - 64 mm (that I've seen). At 64 you can break strings unless you modify the tuning curve down to around +30-32 cents at c88. Changing the gauge won't help. Lower gauge requires less tension but then has a lower breakpoint.
If you're installing a new board you can just move the bridge forward slightly. If not you can sometimes recap the top section and move the bridge pins forward. While you're at it you can create a logarithmic progression in both capo section which is helpful anyway. That's usually how I approach it. The log scale can be done on excel.
------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320
Original Message:
Sent: 09-05-2021 10:37
From: Jim Ialeggio
Subject: Steinway S #88 Speaking length
Anyone out there have a Steinway S's in reasonable condition (maybe even not reasonable condition) in your service If so, do you experience string breakage or not, in the high treble of this instrument.
The S's I have heard have often had a great high treble sustain, and clean low falseness. SL is often very very long, as in 78mm (which is wildly long). 12.5 american gauge (13 metric), all exceeding normal BP% limits. Nice low gage string, a tonal parameter that does not appear on any spread sheet.
I want to know if they do or don't seem to break excessively.
------------------------------
Jim Ialeggio
grandpianosolutions.com
Shirley, MA
978 425-9026
------------------------------