Bechstein hammer bore

[John Delacour]

At 20:16 -0500 15/2/08, A440A at aol.com wrote:

>..I don't waste time measuring the angle of the strings. I simply use a
>small square on the strings, and use trial hammers, with their 
>center line clearly marked and hung at 90 degrees to the shank...

I assure you I don't waste time doing it my way.  It's part of a 
whole process that is likely to differ in many details from the 
process you've developed for yourself.  The important thing is to 
achieve the necessary result, which we agree upon.

>...On instruments that will see extra heavy use, I usually bore a 
>full mm longer than optimum, which will allow for the maximum wear 
>in the "efficient" zone before needing replacement.

Yes, I do that too.

>...On some pianos, the upper treble strings rise so steeply to the bridge
>that the hammer would have to be bored way too short to achieve this 
>90 degrees  by itself, causing a whole train of regulation problems. 
>In these cases, I have found that hanging the hammer at a little 
>less than 90 will allow the hammer/string angle to be 90 degrees and 
>the shank still to be near enough the rest cushion to avoid 
>catastrophic failure under fast repetition.

I can imagine it but have not, recently at least, dealt with such a 
case.  After what I've read of NY Steinway's tolerances on this list, 
I'm prepared for the worst if I should ever have to touch one :-)

In the good old days high class makers had hammers made for both 
grands and uprights that had varying total length to suit their 
scale.  Every set of hammers you see listed nowadays is x in the 
treble and y in the bass both as regards total length and bore.  Last 
year for the very first time I managed to get Abel to make me a set 
that almost reproduced the original total lengths.

JD