Chickering rebuild -- touchweight.

[Gary Rondeau]

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
Just to add some numbers to this, I just measured the strike weight of some of
the old hammers on my old Chickering .  Turns out strike weigth was ~9.3gm in
the bass, around 7 gm in the middle, and about  5-6 gm at the top.  These
numbers are all pretty low and account for the difficulty I am having with the
new set - which I have yet to measure.  (They are "Pacific Gold" hammers -
recommended by the fellow at the parts house who I talked to as a good quality
hammer.   To my ear they produce a nice full sound.)  Now I just have to solve
the "touch weight disaster" thats come from putting these hammers on my old
piano!

Thanks to all who have posted responces to my original inquiry.

Gary Rondeau



David Stanwood wrote:

> Major issue here... should we reproduce what was original or "Improve"
> on it based on evolved knowledge?  I'm sure that my tuning mentor Bill
> Garlick would choose the former.  Based on what I've learned in the field of
> Touch Weight Metrology I can't help but go for the broader dynamic range and
> fuller tone that I know comes from from hammers that are in the High mid to
> high zone.  These hammer weights usually create disaster in regards to touch
> weight when applied to old pianos.
> I also know that with expertise that any action may be configured to handle
> higher weight hammers.  The result usually unleashes a suprizing amount of
> tone potential so I would put myself in the latter catagory... I choose to
> "Improve".  Hammer weights have evolved upwards for good reasons.  Either
> choice is valid if it serves the need of the piano owner.
>
> David Stanwood
>
> >From: "Erwinpiano" <Erwinpiano@email.msn.com>
> >Reply-To: pianotech@ptg.org
> >To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
> >Subject: Re: Chickering rebuild -- touchweight.
> >Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 12:24:28 -0800
> >
> >Hi Brian
> >   I believe there might be one major step and oversight that I ,Yourself
> >and
> >many others  have made at the beginning of any chickering action rebuild
> >And
> >that is to weigh the original hammers and get over the shock of how
> >incredibly light they are.  And then after checking your gram scale a time
> >or two for accuuacy it is realized it was right .  The hmmrs. had to be
> >light for the leverages that were chosen and when the're set up as designed
> >they work well and if not well you're expieriencing that tooo heavy feel .
> >If you can't get the hammer wt. down a slight change in the knuckle
> >placement will get you there but will change the reg. requirements
> >slightly.
> >I have used the ronsen 14 lb. saepele molding and taperes as Newton
> >suggested from strike pt. to tail  and also recove or cove to reduce wt.
> >further.
> >        Your current options are as stated ( reducing wt.if possible) or
> >starting over uugghhh
> >        Good Luck   Dale Erwin
> >
> >
>

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/36/f7/7b/5c/attachment.htm

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--