Fw: Upright Hammer Weight

[Farrell]

Hi Richard. Thoughts interspersed below:

Terry Farrell

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Brekne" <Richard.Brekne@grieg.uib.no>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2001 2:49 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: Upright Hammer Weight


> Farrell wrote:
>
> > Oops. That's right Richard,  Stanwoods numbers are Strike Weight. I was
simply
> >
> > weighing hammers. Now how am I going to measure Strike Weight on the
> > upright? Or rather, I guess I can see how to set it up on the little
stand
> > and measure the Strike Weight, but the real question would be how does
this
> > compare with the grand numbers because now you have the weight of the
hammer
> > butt incorporated into the hammer strike weight number. This is all
becoming
> > clear as I write this. These upright SW measurement made with the butt
> > attached should indeed be directly comparable with the grand SW
measurement.
> > Yes? No? I do believe this would be true. I'll go out into the shop and
> > measure some SWs with the old setup and the new and see where they fall.
> > I'll report back. Maybe I need to even look over Stanwood's stuff, but I
do
> > not recall his material describing how it relates to an upright.
> >
> > Terry Farrell
> >
> >
>
> Well, lacking any wise words from the certified Stanwood boys here, I'd
say that
> measuring SW's for uprights would be pretty much the same procedure. Weigh
the
> key from the center pin similiar to the grand shank

Yes, agree.

>... but I am not sure it
> would be necessary as the "weight" of the shank in uprights is going to be
much
> less a factor because of the fact that its roughly vertical... I would
think
> just weighing the hammers themselves would be enough,

When speaking of touchweight, I would agree. However, regarding the mass of
weight (momentum) behind a hammer when striking a string to produce a
desired spectrum of tones/volumes, I should think it virtually the same as
with the grand. With the grand, you find a desired hammer mass, i.e. Strike
Weight - that will give your piano the sound you want, and then manipulate
the rest of the action  to work with this hammer (or rather SW curve). I
should think this to be the same with the upright regarding sound
production. Yes, I agree that differing SWs on the upright will have less an
effect when measuring DW and UP with a set of weights, and also less an
effect on how the touchweight feels. But the key here is how much hammer do
I need to produce optimal sound for this piano???

> and I suspect that it
> might not really be worth your time... maybe on a really nice upright...
who
> knows ?

I see your point, but keep in mind, all I am trying to do here is simply
arrive at a generally optimal size hammer for the piano. A pretty basic need
I should think.

>In anycase this has nothing to do with Stanwoods touchweight design for
> grands... thats an entirely different puppy. His material doesnt deal with
> uprights.

Correct.

> Still, if its a good upright, it might be neat to hear if the effort of
putting
> the hammers on a nice SW curve results in an easier voicing job, or how
> differing curve zones affects the general sound of the piano.

I think you are on the right track by mentioning voicing and general sound.
Any idealization of hammer weight on the upright I presume will have a much
greater effect on piano sound/voicing (similar as it would on a grand) than
it might have on touchweight - although a bit I suppose - at least from the
inertia standpoint.

> I say... go for it if you got the time !! ;:)

What got me going here is that my new untrimmed hammer weights are 25% to
50% more mass than the old hammers. That seems like a lot! So sure, I
suppose I need to trim/taper them - but do I? How much? etc., etc. I read
about tapering the new hammers to get rid of some weight, but how do we know
where the ideal lies?

I think what I will do is set up some sample notes and try the paper clip
thing like on a grand to increase SW and observe the piano tone. Without
cutting up my new hammers before I know what I am targeting, I suppose it
would be OK to put a #60 hammer in the #40 note position to evaluate what
effect a lighter hammer would have, etc. I'll see what happens!

>
>
>
> --
> Richard Brekne
> RPT, N.P.T.F.
> Bergen, Norway
> mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no
>
>
>