Why?

[Roger Jolly]

Hi Del,
       There is no doubt in my own mind that Renner shanks are superior to
any other that I've used, But there is a lot of variable's 1. Most
cosistent pinning, with graphite coating on felt, their pinning seems a
little firmer than most. 2. Higher quality machining far less travelling
required. 3. Superior grain orientation. 4. Higher quality knuckles than
most. (less cup in the leather) 5.Finally Hornbeam.
  Now for the $64.000 question. Does the material's account for the
difference, or is it superior machining tolerances?
  We have both studied Harold Conklin's film of hammer travel, it would be
interesting to see a similar film made with both materials and identical
machining tolerences. 
  Another observation, when doing the drop/tone test on hammer shanks there
are far less rejects from Hornbeam. Is this the material or the selection
process?
  As I said before I'm going by gut feel.
Nice to hear from you as usual.
Regards Roger
  



At 07:36 PM 6/5/99 -0700, you wrote:
>
>
>Roger Jolly wrote:
>
>> Another variable is the quality of quarter saw and straightness of grain
>> within the shank it self.
>> I have a gut feel that is why the Renner Hornbeam shanks are superior to
>> the maple. I may be out to lunch on that one, just guessing.
>> Regards Roger
>
>----------------------------
>
>And who -- besides Renner, that is -- really believes that hornbeam shanks
are
>superior to even relatively decent maple shanks?
>
>Regards,
>
>Del
>
>
Roger Jolly
Balwin Yamaha Piano Centres.
Saskatoon/Regina.
Canada.