Weights on the keys

[Carl W. Meyer]

I recall installing a pianocorder in an Estey, if I recall the correct
brand, that had the dog leg keys.  I of course adjusted the capstans and
after some time the customer complained of the keys not being level.  I
found that after a goodly amount of playing the lost motion was excessive
and the whippen no longer held the back of the key down.  I don't adhere to
the notion that the manufacturer knows best.  I solved the problem with
jiffy leads and readjusted the capstans.  The customer reported better
repetition.  It may well have been that the piano  was okay when built but
after many years of drying the weight of the key and the whippen was
reduced so that what I thought was lost motion was really non existent and
just showed up at the front top of the key.  I've noticed that many upright
pianos have some keys up and some down when the action is out.  That tells
me that either  the wood has seasoned unevenly or the manufacturer hasn't
known best.  It seems to me that small vertical pianos would repeat better
if the keys were to be at least balanced if not slightly weighted toward
the whippen end.

Carl Meyer
Santa Clara, Ca.   


> [Original Message]
> From: Ron Nossaman <RNossaman@KSCABLE.com>
> To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
> Date: 6/23/00 5:49:52 AM
> Subject: Re: Weights on the keys
>
> >Ron,
> >I agree with you that Dampp-Chaser won't likely work here, but the
problem as
> >stated doesn't involve the keys, so I fail to see how your suggestion of 
> >weighting
> >the keys will help at all.
> >
> >But it does give me opportunity to ask you and the list something that's
been
> >going on in my mind for a number of years.  I have steadfastly refused
to use
> >Jiffy leads because I assumed that, if the piano worked correctly when
it 
> >was new,
> >adding lead weights to the keys is sub-standard piano service, a way to
get 
> >around
> >doing the repair correctly.  Am I right or wrong?  I'm willing to give
them a
> >second look.
> >
> >Regards,
> >Clyde
> 
> Hi Clyde,
> Sorry, wasn't too well said, was it? You're right that the weights won't
do
> anything for the hammer flanges, but after they are lubricated or
> alcohol/water shrunk (I wouldn't re pin except as a last resort) all the
> flange centers (hammer, jack and wip), the other weirdnesses become
> noticeable. What I've found on the old Wurlitzer consoles and spinets is
> big fan angles in the key doglegs, and key ratios leaving a lot of front
> weight on the keys. After the years of use, the key bushings wear and the
> wippen weight is no longer enough to lever the key back up out of the
> groove in that outside bushing (the inside ones last forever, because the
> balance rail pin hardly ever touches them). Your choices for restoring
> function are either rebushing, or backweighting, since you can't do much
> about the design layout. Reasonably, rebushing would be a better option
> because adding backweight will put more pressure on that outside bushing
> and accelerate bushing wear even more. Giving the owners of Wurlitzer
> consoles and spinets an explanation of the problems, and the options of
> replacing the piano, spending $$$$ on repinning, or $ on lubrication, and
> $$$$ on rebushing keys, or $$ on keyweights if necessary after
lubrication,
> I have yet to find one that wanted anything other than the minimum
> expenditure to "make it work". Obviously, the back weighting isn't
> considered if the lubrication, shrinking, or whatever works well enough,
> and it's certainly not technically the best approach. It's a means of
> getting the customer playing again at minimal cost and they will probably
> get another fifteen years of use out of the piano playing on the mortise.
> They'll also comment on how "Easy" it is to play now.
> 
> It's not an ideal fix, but it's expedient, relatively cheap, and a way out
> when you don't have a way around the design limitations anyway. I've put
in
> maybe five sets in over twenty years, so it's not an habitual first
choice.
> It's yet another one of those unfortunate choices between what's right,
> what's possible, and what's affordable.
> 
> I hope that's a better explanation.
> 
> Ron N



--- Carl W. Meyer
--- cmpiano@earthlink.net
--- EarthLink: It's your Internet.