More Inertia and Action Parts

Yardbird47@aol.com Yardbird47@aol.com
Mon, 16 Jan 1995 00:18:49 -0500


A great post by Dennis Johnson (Subj:  Re: Inertia and Action Parts Date:
 95-01-12)

<<We all know that the Hamburg offers greater leverage and can handle a
heavier hammer, if that is what you or the player likes.>>
 Greater leverage for me means the mathematical ratio. Does "greater
leverage" for you mean greater ability to lift a hammer? If moving a heavier
hammer is also what "Ken (Sloane) referred to when he said 'mechanical
advantage.'", we should remember the trade-off involved here. The only reason
we can lift a heavier hammer is because in the bargain  we're also having
less of a distance over which to throw it.
This is leverage's classic trade-of,whether to activate a string with a
heavier but slower slug of mass, or with a light hammer which has a greater
distance over which to develope velocity. There is one theory that because
the pianist has  control over only acceleration, this should be the favored
partner (over mass) which delivers the force With a wider range of
acceleration to play with  and in, the pianist can develope more gradations
of expression.
Another theory says that these strings really need a slug by a bigger mass to
really wake them up. With distortions eliminated in the voicing, they will
sing with a much larger voice. (I have heard this happen myself.)

<<the Renner c.1911 shank with the small knuckle offers a significantly
quicker repetition. >>
At the risk of admitting inexperience, what are the salient features of  the
small knuckle? Is it simply that the jack contact point can be nudged up
closer to the hammer/wippen center axis? Is the quicker curvature if the
small knuckle an advantage or disadvantage when the jack moves out then in?
Would a heavier hammer pound this curvature flat sooner tan a larger knuckles
curvature?

<<These c.1911 parts, when used in combination with an appropriately light
hammer can perform the same touch weight specs. as the Hamburg, but it
requires some radical weight reduction.>>
In what situation do "appropriately light hammers" really need "radical
weight reduction". Are these hammers one in the same? Do I need bi-focals?

<<there is definitely a different "feel" between these actions with more or
less leverage, even when the touch weight is practically the same.>>
That's what we're all chasing after, what Ken Sloane proposed  a colloquium
on in Albukerky. (Did I spell that right?)

<< Two have the Hamburg action with N.Y. hammers and one has the c. 1911 with
Renner Blues.>>
I'd love to be corrected by facts (which are always useful), but aren't the
Renner Blues a notch heavier than the NY Steinway, even after trimming?

<<I offer both dimension actions in our hall, where we have three Steinway
D's..... Many times you just have to make an educated judgement based on your
knowledge of the player, but whenever possible it really helps to have them
come and play the two different actions.>>
You Bet!. Being a rural tuner instead of an institutional type, I would
hunger mightily for what could be learned by having this to offer a pianist.

<<I may have drifted into another topic>>
Knuckle configuration as a function of hammer mass, repetition as a function
of knuckle size. allowing a pianist to sample both a D with acceleration and
a D with  hammer mass...You drifted off into a couple

Thanks again for the post

Bill Ballard RPT     "I gotta go ta woik...."
NH Chapter         Ian Shoales, Duck's Breath M. Theater



This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC