Pianotech

Good day gentle techs. It's been my experience over the last 30+ years that Steinway "B"s have a very obvious lack of depth and power on the last couple of strings in the mid range at the break with the bass strings. I have a customer with an 1895 "A" that has had the last two notes of triple plain wires replaced with 2 wound strings. The bridge and plate at the pins have the holes drilled for 3 strings per note with pins in them so this was probably not a factory conversion. Has anyone here noticed the terrible transition at the break on B's and have any tried converting to wound strings? And please, not commentary on old Steinway's and shelf lives. I'm seeking those who have tried to improve existing Bs. Thank you!

Good day gentle techs. It's been my experience over the last 30+ years that Steinway "B"s have a very obvious lack of depth and power on the last couple of strings in the mid range at the break with the bass strings. I have a customer with an 1895 "A" that has had the last two notes of triple plain wires replaced with 2 wound strings. The bridge and plate at the pins have the holes drilled for 3 strings per note with pins in them so this was probably not a factory conversion. Has anyone here noticed the terrible transition at the break on B's and have any tried converting to wound strings? And please, not commentary on old Steinway's and shelf lives. I'm seeking those who have tried to improve existing Bs. Thank you!

Good day gentle techs. It's been my experience over the last 30+ years that Steinway "B"s have a very obvious lack of depth and power on the last couple of strings in the mid range at the break with the bass strings. I have a customer with an 1895 "A" that has had the last two notes of triple plain wires replaced with 2 wound strings. The bridge and plate at the pins have the holes drilled for 3 strings per note with pins in them so this was probably not a factory conversion. Has anyone here noticed the terrible transition at the break on B's and have any tried converting to wound strings? And please, not commentary on old Steinway's and shelf lives. I'm seeking those who have tried to improve existing Bs. Thank you!

Good day gentle techs. It's been my experience over the last 30+ years that Steinway "B"s have a very obvious lack of depth and power on the last couple of strings in the mid range at the break with the bass strings. I have a customer with an 1895 "A" that has had the last two notes of triple plain wires replaced with 2 wound strings. The bridge and plate at the pins have the holes drilled for 3 strings per note with pins in them so this was probably not a factory conversion. Has anyone here noticed the terrible transition at the break on B's and have any tried converting to wound strings? And please, not commentary on old Steinway's and shelf lives. I'm seeking those who have tried to improve existing Bs. Thank you!

Good day gentle techs. It's been my experience over the last 30+ years that Steinway "B"s have a very obvious lack of depth and power on the last couple of strings in the mid range at the break with the bass strings. I have a customer with an 1895 "A" that has had the last two notes of triple plain wires replaced with 2 wound strings. The bridge and plate at the pins have the holes drilled for 3 strings per note with pins in them so this was probably not a factory conversion. Has anyone here noticed the terrible transition at the break on B's and have any tried converting to wound strings? And please, not commentary on old Steinway's and shelf lives. I'm seeking those who have tried to improve existing Bs. Thank you!

The problem is because the low tenor trichords drop in tension fairly precipitously from about 160lbs to about 120lbs which make the low tenor sound like rubber bands before a big jump in the bass section. Wrapped bichord replacements aren't the best solution as the speaking lengths make that a bit awkward. I've heard of folks doing trichord wrapped subs but that's not ideal either. 

Paullelo wire is probably the best solution along with a slight modification to the top of the bass section to drop tensions slightly and help blend those sections. The original scaling was high at note 20 and many custom scales already drop that. But that doesn't solve the low tenor problem. So I agree with Chris C and working with JD Grant is a reasonable approach. That also saves you hitch pin modification. 

if you're putting in a new soundboard, you can always put in a third bridge if you want to go that route. I'm not saying I would recommend it, but that's probably the best solution from a purely scale tension, BP% point of view. 

Good day gentle techs. It's been my experience over the last 30+ years that Steinway "B"s have a very obvious lack of depth and power on the last couple of strings in the mid range at the break with the bass strings. I have a customer with an 1895 "A" that has had the last two notes of triple plain wires replaced with 2 wound strings. The bridge and plate at the pins have the holes drilled for 3 strings per note with pins in them so this was probably not a factory conversion. Has anyone here noticed the terrible transition at the break on B's and have any tried converting to wound strings? And please, not commentary on old Steinway's and shelf lives. I'm seeking those who have tried to improve existing Bs. Thank you!

Good day gentle techs. It's been my experience over the last 30+ years that Steinway "B"s have a very obvious lack of depth and power on the last couple of strings in the mid range at the break with the bass strings. I have a customer with an 1895 "A" that has had the last two notes of triple plain wires replaced with 2 wound strings. The bridge and plate at the pins have the holes drilled for 3 strings per note with pins in them so this was probably not a factory conversion. Has anyone here noticed the terrible transition at the break on B's and have any tried converting to wound strings? And please, not commentary on old Steinway's and shelf lives. I'm seeking those who have tried to improve existing Bs. Thank you!

Dear Edward!

Steinway model B operates with surprisingly low tensions at some areas-this is truly surprising to many. We at Hellerbass are using an own scale - which is different to the original one - for our bass strings since many years. We also offer scaling the plain wire section ... the softer versions of Paulello wire is really helpful here. Stephen Paulello is also offering a recommendation for Steinway B (see attachment). I would recommend not changing the construction of a Steinway instrument. Using softer wire-at least on the tenor side-is certainly the right way to go. Best regards - Gregor

------------------------------
Gregor Heller
Hellerbass Strings
Eschelbronn
49-6226-42444

Original Message:
Sent: 11-26-2025 14:56
From: Edward Mastin
Subject: Steinway B stringing

Good day gentle techs. It's been my experience over the last 30+ years that Steinway "B"s have a very obvious lack of depth and power on the last couple of strings in the mid range at the break with the bass strings. I have a customer with an 1895 "A" that has had the last two notes of triple plain wires replaced with 2 wound strings. The bridge and plate at the pins have the holes drilled for 3 strings per note with pins in them so this was probably not a factory conversion. Has anyone here noticed the terrible transition at the break on B's and have any tried converting to wound strings? And please, not commentary on old Steinway's and shelf lives. I'm seeking those who have tried to improve existing Bs. Thank you!

------------------------------
Edward Mastin RPT
RPT
Syracuse NY
(315) 422-1291
------------------------------

Good day gentle techs. It's been my experience over the last 30+ years that Steinway "B"s have a very obvious lack of depth and power on the last couple of strings in the mid range at the break with the bass strings. I have a customer with an 1895 "A" that has had the last two notes of triple plain wires replaced with 2 wound strings. The bridge and plate at the pins have the holes drilled for 3 strings per note with pins in them so this was probably not a factory conversion. Has anyone here noticed the terrible transition at the break on B's and have any tried converting to wound strings? And please, not commentary on old Steinway's and shelf lives. I'm seeking those who have tried to improve existing Bs. Thank you!

------------------------------
Edward Mastin RPT
RPT
Syracuse NY
(315) 422-1291
------------------------------

I'd disagree with Heller.  Changing some of the low tenor plain wire trichords to bichords on the Steinway B will yield the absolute best results.  Using Paulello wire and hybrid scaling will definitely make significant improvements, however the improvements will deal strictly with tone and not the imbalance in power coming out of the bass section into the low tenor. 

We are JD GRANDT are a supplier of Paulello wire and I promote it all the time.  However there is more to understand than what has been mentioned here so far.

When using Paulello wire the tension levels on the strings is not altered.  It is the softer steel wire that stretches closer to it's elastic limits which will produce significantly improved tone.  But because tension doesn't change, power doesn't change.  The only way to truly get the absolute best results is to change some of the low trichords to wound bichords, then you are addressing both tone and power for a smooth transition all around.

Because it alters a Steinway, consideration needs to be taken into account whether this will be accepted by whomever the piano will reside with. 

But I just wanted to add our JD GRANDT input and experience to whomever might find it helpful. 

------------------------------
John Schienke
Churchill ON
(905) 773-0087

Original Message:
Sent: 11-26-2025 14:56
From: Edward Mastin
Subject: Steinway B stringing

Good day gentle techs. It's been my experience over the last 30+ years that Steinway "B"s have a very obvious lack of depth and power on the last couple of strings in the mid range at the break with the bass strings. I have a customer with an 1895 "A" that has had the last two notes of triple plain wires replaced with 2 wound strings. The bridge and plate at the pins have the holes drilled for 3 strings per note with pins in them so this was probably not a factory conversion. Has anyone here noticed the terrible transition at the break on B's and have any tried converting to wound strings? And please, not commentary on old Steinway's and shelf lives. I'm seeking those who have tried to improve existing Bs. Thank you!

------------------------------
Edward Mastin RPT
RPT
Syracuse NY
(315) 422-1291
------------------------------

Dear John!

How are you? ... will you be attending the PIPPA convention in Las Vegas again next year? I, for one, will be skipping it ... but I'm sure we'll meet again at the PTG conference in Washington, D.C.

Now back to the topic ... I am somewhat confused by your comment about it not being possible to increase the tension without mechanical intervention in the construction. Of course, it is possible ... all you have to do is increase the diameter of the steel. And as I can read in Chris' comment, you also recommended 22 gauge instead of 20 gauge. That results in an increase from 54 kg to 63 kg. By using softer Paulello wire, the stress rate (correct term?) is still kept within a good range.
Although 54kg resp. 63 kg is still low, Steinway did put some thought into the design of the instrument, and modifications to the construction of a Steinway usually tend to reduce its value, especially when they are clearly visible due to two empty tuning pins.
Especially since reducing the number of strings from three per note to only two per note certainly does not increase the tension, but rather minimizes the power to the bridge and soundboard.
It only makes sense to make this change if you want to increase the tension much further than 64 kg per string. But wouldn't it make more sense to use two notes with wound triple strings? You would then need three additional hitch pins instead of just one, but you wouldn't have two unsightly empty tuning pins. In addition, you would have actually increased the total tension per note rather than decreasing it. I think this would be a better solution.

Here in Germany (in Hamburg, to be precise), there is a now famous workshop called "Klangmanufaktur" (founded by former Steinway employees) that exclusively repairs Steinways. This workshop does not change the number of strings, but reduces the thickness of the soundboard by almost a third to better adapt to the low tension and allow it to vibrate better. ... so there are many possibilities.

Of course, there are those who say that Steinway achieved its fame precisely because of this construction (weak transition) and that nothing should be changed. Others say that the sound image or sound concept has changed over the years and that Steinway is too slow to incorporate design changes ... it is probably impossible to give a definitive answer.

I'd disagree with Heller.  Changing some of the low tenor plain wire trichords to bichords on the Steinway B will yield the absolute best results.  Using Paulello wire and hybrid scaling will definitely make significant improvements, however the improvements will deal strictly with tone and not the imbalance in power coming out of the bass section into the low tenor. 

We are JD GRANDT are a supplier of Paulello wire and I promote it all the time.  However there is more to understand than what has been mentioned here so far.

When using Paulello wire the tension levels on the strings is not altered.  It is the softer steel wire that stretches closer to it's elastic limits which will produce significantly improved tone.  But because tension doesn't change, power doesn't change.  The only way to truly get the absolute best results is to change some of the low trichords to wound bichords, then you are addressing both tone and power for a smooth transition all around.

Because it alters a Steinway, consideration needs to be taken into account whether this will be accepted by whomever the piano will reside with. 

But I just wanted to add our JD GRANDT input and experience to whomever might find it helpful. 

------------------------------
John Schienke
Churchill ON
(905) 773-0087

Original Message:
Sent: 11-26-2025 14:56
From: Edward Mastin
Subject: Steinway B stringing

Good day gentle techs. It's been my experience over the last 30+ years that Steinway "B"s have a very obvious lack of depth and power on the last couple of strings in the mid range at the break with the bass strings. I have a customer with an 1895 "A" that has had the last two notes of triple plain wires replaced with 2 wound strings. The bridge and plate at the pins have the holes drilled for 3 strings per note with pins in them so this was probably not a factory conversion. Has anyone here noticed the terrible transition at the break on B's and have any tried converting to wound strings? And please, not commentary on old Steinway's and shelf lives. I'm seeking those who have tried to improve existing Bs. Thank you!

------------------------------
Edward Mastin RPT
RPT
Syracuse NY
(315) 422-1291
------------------------------

Setting the Steinway "Steinwas" argument aside (BTW when Steinway NY went to the 17mm knuckle around 1985 did all the 15.5 mm Steinways become Steinwas? (grin)), Low Tenor plain wire conversion to Bichord can improve the scale with regard to tension and inharmonicity. However, bass strings also have their own pitfalls like miss matched bichord tuning issues.

One common problem is that low tenor speaking lengths are often longer than optimum forcing toward the thinnest copper windings which I limit to .0007" or .1775mm. I believe there is one size smaller in both " and mm but we try to be nice to our string winders and .0007 / .1775 is likely painful enough.

David Love makes the correct observation that low tenor bichord conversions would often benefit from a 3rd bridge with shorter speaking lengths. This allows more core/wrap diameter options to target Tension Inharmonicity and Break%.

As to the original question, the attached graph has notes 21 through 24 converted to bichords with existing bridge using .041 core, .0007 copper, and 25mm exposed core at bridge and aggraffe. The core wrap diameters of notes 1 through 20 have also be modified (roughed in and not necessarily final). Notes 1 through 88 left to right. Magenta=Break% Red=Tension Blue=Inharmonicity Light Red=Combined tension. 
New Tensions:

Note 20 191 lbs per string 382 lbs total (top bass bridge note)
Note 21 169 lbs per string 338 lbs total (bottom long bridge note)
Note 22 182 lbs per string 364 lbs total
Note 23 197 lbs per string 394 lbs total
Note 24 210 lbs per string 420 lbs total
Note 25 143 lbs per string 429 lbs total (new lowest plain wire trichord)

Links to additional before and after examples are available if one replies Privately.

------------------------------
Tremaine Parsons RPT
Georgetown CA
(530) 333-9299

Original Message:
Sent: 11-28-2025 10:52
From: Gregor Heller
Subject: Steinway B stringing

Dear John!

How are you? ... will you be attending the PIPPA convention in Las Vegas again next year? I, for one, will be skipping it ... but I'm sure we'll meet again at the PTG conference in Washington, D.C.

Now back to the topic ... I am somewhat confused by your comment about it not being possible to increase the tension without mechanical intervention in the construction. Of course, it is possible ... all you have to do is increase the diameter of the steel. And as I can read in Chris' comment, you also recommended 22 gauge instead of 20 gauge. That results in an increase from 54 kg to 63 kg. By using softer Paulello wire, the stress rate (correct term?) is still kept within a good range.
Although 54kg resp. 63 kg is still low, Steinway did put some thought into the design of the instrument, and modifications to the construction of a Steinway usually tend to reduce its value, especially when they are clearly visible due to two empty tuning pins.
Especially since reducing the number of strings from three per note to only two per note certainly does not increase the tension, but rather minimizes the power to the bridge and soundboard.
It only makes sense to make this change if you want to increase the tension much further than 64 kg per string. But wouldn't it make more sense to use two notes with wound triple strings? You would then need three additional hitch pins instead of just one, but you wouldn't have two unsightly empty tuning pins. In addition, you would have actually increased the total tension per note rather than decreasing it. I think this would be a better solution.

Here in Germany (in Hamburg, to be precise), there is a now famous workshop called "Klangmanufaktur" (founded by former Steinway employees) that exclusively repairs Steinways. This workshop does not change the number of strings, but reduces the thickness of the soundboard by almost a third to better adapt to the low tension and allow it to vibrate better. ... so there are many possibilities.

Of course, there are those who say that Steinway achieved its fame precisely because of this construction (weak transition) and that nothing should be changed. Others say that the sound image or sound concept has changed over the years and that Steinway is too slow to incorporate design changes ... it is probably impossible to give a definitive answer.

------------------------------
Gregor Heller
Hellerbass Strings
Eschelbronn
49-6226-42444

Original Message:
Sent: 11-28-2025 09:34
From: John Schienke
Subject: Steinway B stringing

I'd disagree with Heller.  Changing some of the low tenor plain wire trichords to bichords on the Steinway B will yield the absolute best results.  Using Paulello wire and hybrid scaling will definitely make significant improvements, however the improvements will deal strictly with tone and not the imbalance in power coming out of the bass section into the low tenor. 

We are JD GRANDT are a supplier of Paulello wire and I promote it all the time.  However there is more to understand than what has been mentioned here so far.

When using Paulello wire the tension levels on the strings is not altered.  It is the softer steel wire that stretches closer to it's elastic limits which will produce significantly improved tone.  But because tension doesn't change, power doesn't change.  The only way to truly get the absolute best results is to change some of the low trichords to wound bichords, then you are addressing both tone and power for a smooth transition all around.

Because it alters a Steinway, consideration needs to be taken into account whether this will be accepted by whomever the piano will reside with. 

But I just wanted to add our JD GRANDT input and experience to whomever might find it helpful. 

------------------------------
John Schienke
Churchill ON
(905) 773-0087

Original Message:
Sent: 11-26-2025 14:56
From: Edward Mastin
Subject: Steinway B stringing

Good day gentle techs. It's been my experience over the last 30+ years that Steinway "B"s have a very obvious lack of depth and power on the last couple of strings in the mid range at the break with the bass strings. I have a customer with an 1895 "A" that has had the last two notes of triple plain wires replaced with 2 wound strings. The bridge and plate at the pins have the holes drilled for 3 strings per note with pins in them so this was probably not a factory conversion. Has anyone here noticed the terrible transition at the break on B's and have any tried converting to wound strings? And please, not commentary on old Steinway's and shelf lives. I'm seeking those who have tried to improve existing Bs. Thank you!

------------------------------
Edward Mastin RPT
RPT
Syracuse NY
(315) 422-1291
------------------------------

Good points all around.  I remember this very issue being discussed decades ago (so it ain't new), and one comment I heard (from someone who seemed to know) was that, although its well known that bichords there would be a significant improvement, back at that time (of piano design) it was considered a mark of cheap construction (poor design) to have to "resort to wound strings in the tenor". Therefore the decision was made NOT to do so. Whether this is in fact true I cannot attest to, but it would fit with the "typical" SS mindset. Of course, they eventually changed their tune...

Peter Grey Piano Doctor 

------------------------------
Peter Grey
Stratham NH
(603) 686-2395
pianodoctor57@gmail.com

Original Message:
Sent: 11-28-2025 12:57
From: Tremaine Parsons
Subject: Steinway B stringing

Setting the Steinway "Steinwas" argument aside (BTW when Steinway NY went to the 17mm knuckle around 1985 did all the 15.5 mm Steinways become Steinwas? (grin)), Low Tenor plain wire conversion to Bichord can improve the scale with regard to tension and inharmonicity. However, bass strings also have their own pitfalls like miss matched bichord tuning issues.

One common problem is that low tenor speaking lengths are often longer than optimum forcing toward the thinnest copper windings which I limit to .0007" or .1775mm. I believe there is one size smaller in both " and mm but we try to be nice to our string winders and .0007 / .1775 is likely painful enough.

David Love makes the correct observation that low tenor bichord conversions would often benefit from a 3rd bridge with shorter speaking lengths. This allows more core/wrap diameter options to target Tension Inharmonicity and Break%.

As to the original question, the attached graph has notes 21 through 24 converted to bichords with existing bridge using .041 core, .0007 copper, and 25mm exposed core at bridge and aggraffe. The core wrap diameters of notes 1 through 20 have also be modified (roughed in and not necessarily final). Notes 1 through 88 left to right. Magenta=Break% Red=Tension Blue=Inharmonicity Light Red=Combined tension. 
New Tensions:

Note 20 191 lbs per string 382 lbs total (top bass bridge note)
Note 21 169 lbs per string 338 lbs total (bottom long bridge note)
Note 22 182 lbs per string 364 lbs total
Note 23 197 lbs per string 394 lbs total
Note 24 210 lbs per string 420 lbs total
Note 25 143 lbs per string 429 lbs total (new lowest plain wire trichord)

Links to additional before and after examples are available if one replies Privately.

------------------------------
Tremaine Parsons RPT
Georgetown CA
(530) 333-9299

Original Message:
Sent: 11-28-2025 10:52
From: Gregor Heller
Subject: Steinway B stringing

Dear John!

How are you? ... will you be attending the PIPPA convention in Las Vegas again next year? I, for one, will be skipping it ... but I'm sure we'll meet again at the PTG conference in Washington, D.C.

Now back to the topic ... I am somewhat confused by your comment about it not being possible to increase the tension without mechanical intervention in the construction. Of course, it is possible ... all you have to do is increase the diameter of the steel. And as I can read in Chris' comment, you also recommended 22 gauge instead of 20 gauge. That results in an increase from 54 kg to 63 kg. By using softer Paulello wire, the stress rate (correct term?) is still kept within a good range.
Although 54kg resp. 63 kg is still low, Steinway did put some thought into the design of the instrument, and modifications to the construction of a Steinway usually tend to reduce its value, especially when they are clearly visible due to two empty tuning pins.
Especially since reducing the number of strings from three per note to only two per note certainly does not increase the tension, but rather minimizes the power to the bridge and soundboard.
It only makes sense to make this change if you want to increase the tension much further than 64 kg per string. But wouldn't it make more sense to use two notes with wound triple strings? You would then need three additional hitch pins instead of just one, but you wouldn't have two unsightly empty tuning pins. In addition, you would have actually increased the total tension per note rather than decreasing it. I think this would be a better solution.

Here in Germany (in Hamburg, to be precise), there is a now famous workshop called "Klangmanufaktur" (founded by former Steinway employees) that exclusively repairs Steinways. This workshop does not change the number of strings, but reduces the thickness of the soundboard by almost a third to better adapt to the low tension and allow it to vibrate better. ... so there are many possibilities.

Of course, there are those who say that Steinway achieved its fame precisely because of this construction (weak transition) and that nothing should be changed. Others say that the sound image or sound concept has changed over the years and that Steinway is too slow to incorporate design changes ... it is probably impossible to give a definitive answer.

------------------------------
Gregor Heller
Hellerbass Strings
Eschelbronn
49-6226-42444

Original Message:
Sent: 11-28-2025 09:34
From: John Schienke
Subject: Steinway B stringing

I'd disagree with Heller.  Changing some of the low tenor plain wire trichords to bichords on the Steinway B will yield the absolute best results.  Using Paulello wire and hybrid scaling will definitely make significant improvements, however the improvements will deal strictly with tone and not the imbalance in power coming out of the bass section into the low tenor. 

We are JD GRANDT are a supplier of Paulello wire and I promote it all the time.  However there is more to understand than what has been mentioned here so far.

When using Paulello wire the tension levels on the strings is not altered.  It is the softer steel wire that stretches closer to it's elastic limits which will produce significantly improved tone.  But because tension doesn't change, power doesn't change.  The only way to truly get the absolute best results is to change some of the low trichords to wound bichords, then you are addressing both tone and power for a smooth transition all around.

Because it alters a Steinway, consideration needs to be taken into account whether this will be accepted by whomever the piano will reside with. 

But I just wanted to add our JD GRANDT input and experience to whomever might find it helpful. 

------------------------------
John Schienke
Churchill ON
(905) 773-0087

Original Message:
Sent: 11-26-2025 14:56
From: Edward Mastin
Subject: Steinway B stringing

Good day gentle techs. It's been my experience over the last 30+ years that Steinway "B"s have a very obvious lack of depth and power on the last couple of strings in the mid range at the break with the bass strings. I have a customer with an 1895 "A" that has had the last two notes of triple plain wires replaced with 2 wound strings. The bridge and plate at the pins have the holes drilled for 3 strings per note with pins in them so this was probably not a factory conversion. Has anyone here noticed the terrible transition at the break on B's and have any tried converting to wound strings? And please, not commentary on old Steinway's and shelf lives. I'm seeking those who have tried to improve existing Bs. Thank you!

------------------------------
Edward Mastin RPT
RPT
Syracuse NY
(315) 422-1291
------------------------------