BaldwinSF-10

[David Love]

Bob:

I realize after reading your post again that you don't necessarily say that
the front weights are high, just that they are as high as you would like
them.  But my experience with many Baldwins (not all)  is that they have
unacceptably high action ratios which, when combined with even medium weight
hammers, produce rather unpleasant actions to play.  I have found that
capstan relocation to achieve a reasonable action ratio has produced the
best results.  On occasion, with older Baldwins, I have not been able to
move the capstan far enough without having to jump through hoops with the
relocation of the wippen cushion (key ratios up around .60 or higher) and an
assist spring has been needed to achieve the desired result.  I don't really
like to go to an ultra light hammer on an SD-10, or its equivalent, though
my objection might be less strenuous than some.  I have not had the feedback
from pianists that play these pianos that a high ratio action was the reason
they preferred to play them.  I can say that I have had pianists object to
the way they (Baldwins) have played and have been called upon to modify the
touchweight dynamics accordingly.  In these cases I have, in my usual
fashion, aimed for a 5.6 - 5.7 action ratio with strike weights that bring
the front weights comfortably below maximums (10 - 15%).  I have yet to have
a complaint with this approach, at least not that I have heard about.

David Love

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Love" <davidlovepianos@earthlink.net>
To: "Pianotech" <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: December 10, 2002 3:51 PM
Subject: Re: BaldwinSF-10


It's a little hard to talk about these things without the actual numbers,
but if a medium to low medium zone hammer/strike weight produces a
relatively high front weight pattern, then it suggests that the ratio is in
the higher range.

David Love


----- Original Message -----
From: <BobDavis88@aol.com>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: December 10, 2002 8:37 AM
Subject: Re: BaldwinSF-10


They say that you don't have to worry about talking to yourself, just when
you answer. That considered, I'm replying to my own mail (below).

David Love suggested capstan relocation. The particular piano I referred to
in that note [Baldwin SD-10] actually had a pretty good action ratio. A 10
mm
dip would produce a blow of only 1-3/4". It was also already leaded as far
as
I was comfortable with. Since lighter hammers sounded good, that was the way
we went. I might add that these Renner Blues were not what I would consider
"light" by any means, even after prep and filing. More like medium to low
medium, if memory serves.

We do service a 40's Baldwin L  that regulates to 9.5 mm x 1-7/8".
Bob

In a message dated 12/09/2002 7:38:58 PM Pacific Standard Time,
BobDavis88@aol.com writes:

> In a message dated 12/09/2002 7:02:37 PM Pacific Standard Time,
>  davidlovepianos@earthlink.net writes:
>
>  > Isaac hammers would also sound good on this piano.
>
>  Yes they would. I think very elastic hammers help Baldwins of all size
and
>  age even more than they help other makes.
>
>  I also second Dale's comment about the checking the leverage carefully. I
>  suggested Ronsen hammers for an SD-10 recently for that reason, but the
>  client insisted on Renner Blues. We tapered and coved all we could and
still
>
>  had to file them rather severely to get the strike weight down to a
>  reasonable balance without raising the leading into the "inertia zone."
>
_______________________________________________
pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives


_______________________________________________
pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives