S&S D with high strings/low action stack

[David Love]

I doubt it.  In my experience Steinway adheres to factory specs even if the
piano doesn't call for it.  Likely the hammers were bored standard and were
overstriking from the start.  

David Love
davidlovepianos at comcast.net 
www.davidlovepianos.com

-----Original Message-----
From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf
Of Andrew and Rebeca Anderson
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 6:27 PM
To: ilvey at sbcglobal.net; Pianotech List
Subject: Re: S&S D with high strings/low action stack

David,
I'm estimating by Steinway's measurements.  The bass hammer is 1/8" 
under spec and is overstriking a little over 3/16",  The treble 
hammer is 3/16" under spec and is overstriking 3/8".
Maybe the new hammers *were* bigger than spec.

Andrew Anderson


At 03:20 PM 10/16/2006, you wrote:
>But haven't these hammers been filed quite a bit?   How would one 
>estimate where they were originally, as far as over-striking?
>
>David Ilvedson, RPT
>Pacifica, CA  94044
>
>
>----- Original message ----------------------------------------
>From: "Ric Brekne" <ricbrek at broadpark.no>
>To: "Andrew and Rebeca Anderson" <anrebe at sbcglobal.net>, pianotech 
><pianotech at ptg.org>
>Received: 10/16/2006 12:06:33 PM
>Subject: Re: S&S D with high strings/low action stack
>
>
> >Hi again
>
> >Well it looks like our (actually you had it all along) origional call on
> >this was the right one. Nice one.
>
> >As far as solutions go... Its all well and fine that Steinway sends you
> >some shims to raise the action... this will get you a ways down the road
> >to be sure.  But it sounds like the guy from the service department out
> >and out admits a production fault concerning the plate height to begin
> >with.  Ok... he gives 7&7/8's as a max and you say you are perhaps at
> >8... but.... hey....  That coupled with the symptoms you give clearly
> >show the piano left the factory with a problem that should have been
> >corrected.... at least it looks pretty clear from hear :)  Couple in
> >also that he is recommending a new set of hammers with a custom
> >bore..... wellllllll..
>
> >If the piano is under warranty then I think you have a good case...
>
> >I dont know how hard you want to press this given your situation there.
> >Perhaps it might be easier to just shim and put on a new set of hammers
> >in the end.  Whose paying for all the effort and parts then ??  You say
> >he reccommends <<buying>> a set of hammers ??... on a warranty piano ??
>
> >Something sounds a bit off the proverbial wall here.
>
> >In any case... I'd shim the stack whatever you need / can get,  hang a
> >new set of hammers, leave the keyframe as is... and send S&S the bill :)
>
> >Cheers
> >RicB
>
> >Andrew and Rebeca Anderson wrote:
> >> Continuing saga:
> >> I spoke with a Steinway technician in the service department this
> >> morning (name slips me) and have the following solution(s) recommended,
> >>     He is sending 1/16" walnut shims cut to fit under the action feet
> >> and raise the action by that much, I'll have to re-time the checking
> >> &         reset let-off
> >>     he recommends buying the un-bored Steinway hammers and custom
> >> boring them to take up some of the over-striking difference
> >>         (my measurements on the existing hammers suggest that they
> >> have been over-filed already by 1/8 -3/16" so my high grit
> >> polishing isn't the first time this has been done.)
> >> We discussed string height and he gave one specification: note 66 is
> >> to be 7&3/4" +/- 1/8" above the key-bed.  I pointed out that my
> >> measurements put this area very close to 8".  He became a little
> >> defensive and said that fixing this would require rebuilding the piano
> >> and that Steinway wasn't going to do this (I had mentioned the piano
> >> was still under warranty).  I then asked him about Steinway policy
> >> regarding over-striking.  He plainly said that the hammers shouldn't
> >> overstrike.  Of-course they all do now by significantly more than the
> >> amount they have been filed under standard bore and most likely were
> >> by a significant amount when the piano was new.
> >> I mentioned checking and capsizing problems with too short hammer
> >> tails too far above the action and he didn't have much to add other
> >> than that shimming the action by 1/16 should help with the capsizing.
> >> He couldn't get me stats on the size of the un-bored hammers.  I'm
> >> guessing they are the same size as the bored ones and I'm not too
> >> enthusiastic about boring those much lower on the tail.  Custom
> >> hammers by another hammer maker may be the better way to go, but than
> >> there is the Steinway Only politics to deal with...
> >>
> >> So, my solution is drifting towards this:
> >>     Shim the key-frame 1/16"
> >>     Shim the action stack 1/16"
> >>     Recommend new hammers (really this should be a warranty item too,
> >> there is significant labor in this)
> >> This gets me a third of the way with adequate clearance at the
> >> fall-board and 1/16" clearance at the pinblock with the drop screws
> >> backed all the way out.  Taller hammers will drag going in and out and
> >> I'll have to watch that (had a mishap on a Chinese-made piano
> >> yesterday).  By shimming both I reduce the problem to the neighborhood
> >> of  1/16" so a lower bore won't be so worrisome.
> >>
> >> Do any of you have more to add?
> >>
> >> Andrew Anderson, Artisan Piano
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>