[CAUT] More hammer length needed

[Bob Hull]

The hammer flange center pin is 148 off the keybed.  String ht is as low as 190 in the low tenor.   I reconsidered the idea of lowering the stack at the cleats and decided that would alter the magic line.  Perhaps the capstan could be moved to help that.  However,  I believe that just trimming the hammer felt or just drilling through it is the best solution.  I shouldn't have thought of that "territory" as being "sacred".   Just a little awkward, that's all.  

Thanks for the comments.
Bob Hull  


________________________________
 From: Dale Erwin <erwinspiano at aol.com>
To: caut at ptg.org 
Sent: Thursday, February 7, 2013 9:03 PM
Subject: Re: [CAUT] More hammer length needed
 

Hi Bob 
 fist double check your calculations to be sure. Perhaps you already did this. If so then....What does the hammer flange center pin measure off the keybed. What are the string heights. 145 mm is a most center pin ht.,  or at least more usual than not. String height 190 to 192 in the tenor treble is common
 If the center pin is higher than 145 mm off the k.Bed then I would recommend lowering it by taking down the action cleats which is a WAY easier feat than the drastic keybed remedy mentioned.. Lowering the action stack by thinning the cleats will solve your issue with out taking such a huge risk as planing down the bottom of the key frame and then hoping to get it flat again. Capische?
The farther things are from spec the more action issues you will have. ie No magic line compliance, capstans buried. Back check heights wrong etc.


Dale Erwin R.P.T.
Erwin's Piano Restoration Inc.
Mason & Hamlin/Steinway/U.S. pianos
www.Erwinspiano.com
Phone: 209-577-8397

 
  




-----Original Message-----
From: Ari Isaac <isaac at isaacpiano.com>
To: caut <caut at ptg.org>
Sent: Thu, Feb 7, 2013 1:55 pm
Subject: Re: [CAUT] More hammer length needed


Hi Bob. The problem isn't as severe as you might think. It's true that the early Steinway hammers were quite short.  What I've done
on previous sets for early Steinways, which happened quite often, is to trim
back the felt in the low tenor where, as you say, you'd have to drill into
the felt.  this presents no problem. That's all that's involved.  Also, your
measurements aren't as short as others I've had to deal with so I don't see
much of a problem.   Hope this helps. ari isaac hand made bass strings and piano hammers 416 229 2096 isaac at isaacpiano.com http://www.isaacpiano.com http://www.facebook.com/isaacpiano.com -----Original Message-----
From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Bob
Hull
Sent: February-07-13 12:24 PM
To: caut at ptg.org Subject: [CAUT] More hammer length needed I am building a new top action with WN&G Parts.  The piano is a 1923
Steinway M. The needed hammer lengths after calculations is from 42.5 mm in
the low tenor to 45 mm in the high treble.
Bass hammer calculations call  for 50 mm hammer boring in the low bass up to
52 mm at the top of the bass section. Obviously this would have me drilling
just about into the felt on the lower ends of the sections.   The old
hammers are raked I guess to allow more hammer length. I don't want to rake
the hammers on the new action.  What do you think about planing down the key
frame bottom or rails to remove 2-3 mm of height ? I am installing new key
pins anyway. Also,  The clearance above the stack to the pin block is barely
more than 1/4".  It has been rebuilt at least once already so it's hard to
know what the original set-up was.  With WN&G rails and parts I can adjust
things much more easily than with the SS fixed rails/brackets. What do you
think about this solution of altering the key frame? Somehow I need more
distance between the hammer action center and the string ht. in order to
drill lower on the hammer. 
Bob Hull
Sent from my iPhone 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/caut.php/attachments/20130207/91e5521e/attachment.htm>