May Their Practice rooms be filled with 1098's

[Robin Blankenship]

On the premise that there are two primary modes of turning the pins; one
being continuous pulling/pushing; and, bumping/nudging the hammer, do any of
you have experience in comparison of these modes applied to the 1098? I have
gotten conflicting results, depending on the individual piano involved. Some
respond well to the bumping modes; while others demand an arduous workout,
elbow on back, HEAVE.....HEAVE........HEAVE............UMMMMMMPH.

Robin Blankenship
Samurai Tuner-dude


----- Original Message -----
From: Newton Hunt <nhunt@jagat.com>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Monday, December 04, 2000 4:05 PM
Subject: Re: May Their Practice rooms be filled with 1098's


> Ron is right on.
>
> These pianos do render too well.  If you keep your hammer as
> close to 10:00 as you can keep it the better you can control
> the flag poling because the pull of the hammer is counter
> balanced by the pull of the string.  The problem is that Ron
> is too short to reach the hammer at that position.
>
> One hammer that does work, and exceptionally well, is an
> impact hammer.  It turns the pin instead of flexing it and
> they are so easy to tune that way that you wonder why you
> didn't do this a long time ago.  Not perfect but what a
> difference.  You do need to hold the hammer so as to take
> the weight of the hammer off the pin.
>
> They are spiteful pianos to tune and so is Steinway for not
> making changes to accomodate those who service the damned
> things.  Just my opinion mind you but if I am the one to
> tune it I will not recommend a piano that tortures me.  They
> make them to accommodate THEIR values which means butkus
> after they leave the factory.
>
> Newton
>
> Ron Nossaman wrote:
> >
> > >    OK, in my experience, as you're trying to bring a string up to
pitch, it
> > >doesn't seem to want to go, in spite of the obvious movement of the pin
in
> > >the block. Then,,,,,zoom! the string finally renders,,,,,,,right past
where
> > >you wished it would go. I have often wondered if the pressure bar isn't
too
> > >low or something.  Anybody care to give their imput? Believe me, I'd
like
> > >nothing more than to be able to easily tune these things, but after
tuning
> > >three or four in practice rooms, I'm done for the day. As opposed to
being
> > >able to tune twice as many Yamaha's or Kawai's.
> >
> > I haven't had any to deal with on a regular basis until recently, so I'm
> > anything but an authoritative opinion, but it seems to me it's the other
> > way. The strings seem to me to render too easily, at least on the new
ones.
> > Hammer position and technique do make a tremendous difference for me. I
> > found that pulling from anything past about 1:00 o'clock on those
terribly
> > tight pins sprung the pin down enough that, even though I was taking up
> > string, the pitch stayed nearly the same or even dropped some. Then,
when I
> > let up on the hammer, the pin sprung back up and pulled the string
sharp.
> > Pushing BACK on the hammer somewhat as I turned the pin helped too, with
> > the hammer at 12:00. The toughest part for me is finding the equilibrium
> > point where the string tension balances the back torque and flagpole
pull
> > of the pin so the note will stay where I put it. Just pulling the tip
off
> > of the pin is too often enough to disturb the tuning. I have the best
luck
> > at the 11-12 o'clock position, intentionally flagpoling the pin back and
> > forth after turning it to position, to determine where the equilibrium
> > point is, then rotating the pin to center it. I do something very
similar
> > with any other tuning, as I expect you all do, but I have to pay more
> > attention and spend more time with these. They do sound pretty good when
> > you finally get them tuned, but it does seem like unnecessary abuse to
get
> > that done.
> >
> > My take,
> >
> > Ron N
>