---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment Ola, In good condition and properly regulated, there should be no lost motion, just like an Erard-type double escapement action. As far as the bass hammers are concerned, something is strange there. If the blow distance is correct, there should be no problem getting the action in and out of the piano. One more oddity about this type of action is that the height of the hammer flange rail is easily adjustable and can be part of the regulation procedure. This might make a difference, but otherwise it sounds like some sort of repair has taken place since 1916 which have changed the dimensions. A horrible thought occurs to me that the pin block has been replaced with a thicker one and the hammer flange rail lowered to compensate. I hope that's not the case. Paul Ola Andersson wrote: > Paul S. Larudee wrote > > Ola, > > You will no doubt observe that the hammer rest rail is NOT > adjustable. The hammer was not designed to rest on the > rail. Rather, the spring which you removed and then put > back must be adjusted until it suspends the hammer at just > the right distance > > Paul S. Larudee, RPT > Richmond, CA > > But is there supposed to be lost motion or was it right to lift the > jack up to the hammer?If it should be lost motion, how much?The Grand > is sold to Malaysia and I'm affraid of lifting the bass hammers up > from the restrailbecause the hammers can't go under the pinblock. > Comments? Ola ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/7f/72/f2/64/attachment.htm ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC