Steinway action noise

John Delacour JD at Pianomaker.co.uk
Mon Nov 19 15:24:15 MST 2007


At 17:28 -0500 18/11/07, Greg Newell wrote:

>John,
>                 Awesome graphics! How do you do that?

SmileLab <http://www.satimage.fr/software/en/index.html>

>P.S. along with other disparities I see the core to hammer flange 
>center is slightly different too!

16.2 rather than 16.  Why Renner use this dimension I have no idea. 
I bought Renner for this job because I don't like Abel's shanks, 
which I find to be poorly finished and with bad grain direction. 
I've had some very nice shanks from Detoa, but they don't do Steinway 
so far as I know.

Some pretty radical suggestions have been given you about this 
action!  You say it's an old 'A'.  Whether you mean 'A' and not the 
Model '0' (_nought_, 6ft, 85 notes) I don't know, because people 
refer to the 6ft. model by various names.  Either way the piano is 
likely to have been set up originally very exactly in that era, so 
any talk of moving the standards or the rails seems to me rather 
dangerous and will, like any slight adjustment of anything in the 
action, affect a dozen other things.

...I wrote that this morning before you had given the number, and 
that figures perfectly, that is 1895-99.  There was no model A at the 
time, though the bass scale has the same layout and lengths.  You 
have 2 pairs of bichords and 7 covered trichords on the long bridge.

The hammers visible in your picture are the originals, wired together 
high on the flanks as per patent number (left it at the factory!). 
Below is a picture of a similar shank with crucial dimensions.  This 
is hammer number 6.  The shank is round and of hornbeam.  Possibly 
this is from a Hamburg-made piano but in those days there was no 
difference I think, and things were done very exactly.  The distance 
from centre to hammer-core is shown here as 130mm.  It is just 
possible that on the style 0 and pianos from that era this dimension 
was 125mm.  I don't have one around to check, but it is one or the 
other and it will be obvious which with such a large difference as 
5mm.




So the distance from middle of hammer-rail to middle of hammer-core 
should be 153mm. for the strike line to be right.  But your man has 
taken off the old heads and stuck them on new shanks by the look of 
it, so goodness knows how well that was done.

You can be sure that the action standards and rails were placed in 
exactly the right position by Steinway, since Steinway was then 
Steinway.  If your man has not chewed up too many of the screw-holes 
and you can get away with it, I'd keep the original rails provided 
they have not split.  Otherwise fit new rails.  They don't cost much 
and don't take long to drill if you prepare the work properly.  The 
worst past of the job is soldering in the new rails in the right 
position.

Once you have checked that the hammer-heads are glued on at the right 
place (not at all certain, I'd think) then you can almost certainly 
get the thing working satisfactorily with the existing new parts in 
spite of the discrepancies.  People have mentioned packing with 
buckskin.  I've never seen this and wouldnt recommend it.  Use strips 
of card about 5mm wide to tip pack the lever flanges, so that the 
card is squeezed at least between the rail and all of the top hollow 
of the profile.  More is OK.

Incidentally the Steinway jack in those days was not adjustable as to 
its rest position but rested against a cloth-backed felt in the 
window of the cradle.

What I'd advise is to do the minimum but do it very right.  Unless 
you have a precise drawing, or preferably a movie, of a section of 
the piano complete with action, you can go round in circles for a 
week or two and get nowhere once you start guessing that such and 
such might fix such and such.  Get 5 notes right first and the rest 
is plain sailing.

JD



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20071119/2b984c86/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: steinway_shank.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 42849 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20071119/2b984c86/attachment-0001.jpg 


More information about the Pianotech mailing list

This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC