> I can see reasons for having the hammer strike perpendicular to the > string line. But I don't see any good reason for having the hammer > perpendicular to the shank or the shank parallel to the string. Reasons > given in the archives or the journal for not permitting non-parallel > shanks are along the lines of: The ideal might be more like the shank canter pin being as close as possible to the height of the hammer/string contact point. That's the only way the hammer will be hitting the string square. With the shank parallel to the string at hammer contact, the hammer is moving forward when it hits the string, even if the hammer head is perpendicular. Anything else is mostly a matter of getting the available parts to clear one another and work together both within the action, and with the action in the piano. Invent new action parts, re-arrange the pinblock to get a taller action under it, and you can get the hammer to hit the strings both square to the string, and from a DIRECTION or VECTOR that's also nearly perpendicular to the string - which isn't possible with the current action design. No? Ron N
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC