[CAUT] Down Weight Too High With New Hammers

[David Love]

Just two comments FWIW.  If the shanks cause the action to require a .415
key dip (meaning deep) likely the action ratio is low enough which it
doesn't sound like from the description.  Moving key lead toward the front
in order to increase the front weight and lower the balance weight can be
counterproductive.  The issue isn't the number of leads but the placement
and overall front weight.  Packing the front of the key with lead even if
it's fewer can contribute to the MOI and create a heavier feeling action
than more leads with equal front weight closer to the balance rail.  Given
the choice of 5 or even 6 leads closer to the balance rail versus 3 pushed
up close to the front of the key and equal front weights you will probably
be better off with more located farther back in terms of performance.  

 

David Love

www.davidlovepianos.com

 

From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Brent
Fischer
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 2:25 PM
To: caut at ptg.org
Subject: Re: [CAUT] Down Weight Too High With New Hammers

 





 

Paul,

 

      Someone will feel this is a heavy action to play. Take your reps

off and replace the whippen heel felt. Use Pianotek's green action

cloth, medium thickness and that will solve that issue. Replace

the jack punchings to reduce noise and the rep lever punchings

also.  Make sure the centers are in spec.

 The shanks you are using may push a .415 keydip making

it "feel" heavy. If you are dealing with the accelerated action, there

was pre-leading done close to the balance rail. Take a bass and

mid-range key and re-move the three closest leads to the balance

rail. Move leads as close to the front as possible with a fifty-gram

weight on the front and see what you get, if the results along with

reducing molding weight as suggested on these trial keys gets

you there then pull the leads and re-weigh as close to the front

as possible, plug holes, I believe Pianotek sells the plugs. Make

the damper lift just a hair late and you may be home free young

man with 30 bucks of material.

 

Brent


--- On Tue, 8/24/10, Wigent, Donald E, Jr <WIGENTD at ecu.edu> wrote:


From: Wigent, Donald E, Jr <WIGENTD at ecu.edu>
Subject: Re: [CAUT] Down Weight Too High With New Hammers
To: "caut at ptg.org" <caut at ptg.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 24, 2010, 7:14 AM

Hi Paul Don Wigent here.  It is possible to take wate off the hammers by
taking wood from the inside of the hammer tales, If there is some wood to
remove. Remember 1 gram at the hammer   equals 5 at the key. If you should
deside to remove some wood from the inside of the hammer tale, use a small
drumb sander on some sort of drill pres or some thing. It can be dun by hand
no jig needed..  Between the removal of wood and proper regulation you will
have less tw
Don Wigent
PS Don't get wigged out just do your job..      
-----Original Message-----
From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Paul
Milesi, RPT
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2010 4:54 PM
To: PTG CAUT List
Subject: [CAUT] Down Weight Too High With New Hammers

I installed pre-hung S&S hammers on the '70 S&S D, forced to use original
repetitions because of budget considerations.  With the regulation only
"roughed in," the down weight feels too high to me when I play it.  Now I
find it's measuring in the range of 55-60 grams throughout.  I have
addressed friction in every area except removing and cleaning repetitions.
I can't believe rep spring grooves, etc., would make that much of a
difference; they don't seem that bad.

The new hammers are hung on NY improved shanks with knuckle further out.

I compared hammer/shank/flange #44 from the original and new sets, and there
is, if I remember correctly, about a 2 gram difference.  But the originals
are so beat, I don't know if it's a very meaningful comparison.

Would mixing original 1970 reps with NYI H/S/F cause the geometry to be that
different?  I was told by David Kirkland that I could "make it work,"
although using older repetitions wasn't first choice.  I know the hammer
weight changed in 1984, but understood that using NYI shanks and flanges
would be all the compensation that was needed for the additional weight.

By the way, the upweight measures roughly 28-30g.  Also a little high, no?
And it seems to me there's a lot of lead in the keys, but I'm definitely no
expert.  Doesn't this imply a somewhat too-heavy hammer?

I don't mean to be taking any shortcuts here, but there are time constraints
and a balance/compromise that must be struck with all the other instruments
I'm responsible for.  This one is starting to drown me.  Just wondering if
this touchweight issue is common when putting new hammers on a Steinway D
from this period, and if there is a typical or common remedy or approach to
solving the problem.

This is only my 3rd set of hammers, and my first set completely on my own.
I'm thinking of attending the PTG hammer hanging class with Mike Carraher
and Keith Bowman in October.  Any thoughts on whether I'll learn skills in
addition to hanging (determining bore angle, etc. and boring hammers, I
assume?) that might help me fix this?  Will they address how to arrive at
final touch weight?  I want to learn!  Guess I should contact Mike or Keith.

OK, now I've exposed my near-total ignorance in this area and am
embarrassed.  Thanks in advance for any suggestions.
-- 
Paul Milesi, RPT
Staff Piano Technician
Howard University Department of Music
Washington, DC



 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/caut.php/attachments/20100824/68ec7bb7/attachment.htm>