Haha, I was just about to go through the lengthy process of cutting down ALL the wipp rebound cushions, when I discovered the REAL reason for my little dilemma. I use the spurlock letoff jig (see pic) and I initially adjusted it for the exact string height measurements (taken--with great care--from the action cavity before removing the old strings) then placed the jig on my work table, and lined up the bass hammer line to it.
That's when I found that I could onlky get 1.5" blow even woith the shanks fully resting on the cushions. So, like many of you I initially suspected it was something to do with the new wipps, hammer bore maybe too long, etc. So I REMEASURED the jig for correct height again on my work bench and hello!
To my utter surprise the bottom (supposedly flat) piece of the jig was slightly warped, causing the whole jig to lean toward the action, effectively LOWERING what I thought was the correct height...by almost 1/4"!!!! I had not noticed this before! You can see in the pic the big gap in the back as it tilts forward.
Somehow it was flat and NOT leaning when I first adjusted it on a different surface, but failed to recheck it on the work table! So to keep the jig flat and stable, I used my jiffy weight case to secure it and keep it flat. So mystery solved and thanks all for your great insights and help!
Terry Peterson
Accurate Piano Service
UniGeezer.com
"Over 50, and not "2" Tired!"
From: ed440 at mindspring.com
To: pianotech at ptg.org
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2009 10:19:52 -0400
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Steinway L rebuild question
David-
That may be so, even likely, and I have done
what you say to lower the hammer shank cushions.
A few measurements and calculations that take 5
minutes will confirm it, before undertaking surgery on the
cushions.
Irregularities in action geometry of fine
American pianos are not unheard of. Checking bore distance and strike line
are simple, basic checks which everyone can and, I believe, should learn to
make. If you take these measurements, Brooks, Ltd. will bore and hang the
hammers to match the specs you send them, at no extra charge.
Ed Sutton
----- Original Message -----
From:
David Love
To: pianotech at ptg.org
Sent: Saturday, July 25, 2009 9:51
AM
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Steinway L
rebuild question
If
he used factory bore specs and can only get 1.5” of blow distance likely the
wippen cushion is the culprit. Otherwise, the suggestion is that the
bore dimension would be off by ¼” having to reduce the bore distance to about
1.5” in the treble/tenor. Seems unlikely. >From the photos you
can see that the rest cushions are very high. Look seriously into doing
what Jon and I suggested and simply peel off the red felt and either peel the
underfelt down to a reasonable height or replace it. Wippen elevations
can be inconsistent on Steinways and sometimes even the normal thickness
cushions on, say, a Renner wippen will not leave enough clearance between the
shank and the cushion. Ideally, there should be 1 to 1 ½ shank
thicknesses between the shank and the cushion. If you set the shank just
fractionally off the rest cushion then as the blow distance increases with
settling and compression you will have the shank resting on the cushion which
isn’t a good thing.
David
Love
www.davidlovepianos.com
From:
pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of
Ed Sutton
Sent: Saturday, July 25, 2009 3:38 AM
To:
pianotech at ptg.org
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Steinway L rebuild
question
But the information
you give indicates that the hammer bore distance is _not_ fine. Is the
keyframe properly bedded? If so, you need to measure string height(A) and
cener pin height of the hammer flange(B). Bore distance = A - B.
"Factory spec." is
generic, not optimal. In the factory hammers are hung generically without
regard for other deviations from factory spec. in building the
piano.
Ed S.
Original
Message -----
From: pianolover 88
To: pianotech at ptg.org
Sent: Saturday, July
25, 2009 12:25 AM
Subject: Re: [pianotech]
Steinway L rebuild question
Thanks for all
the helpful replies. The hammer bore is fine; no difference in strike
distance using OLD hammer and new wipp. Btw, I had W. Brooks hang the
hammers to the shanks using Steinway L specs. I just screwed them on and
aligned and travelled as necessary. Yes, new wippen cushions seem to be the
culprit as they are indeed 3-4mm higher than the originals.
I think
I will try the compression method for 24 hours and see if they stay
compressed enough to give me 1 3/4" plus maybe at least a hair of space
between the shank and cushion. Other than that everything seems peachy!
I was at the client's house yesterday prepping for restringing, and
there were maby 8-10 pins that came out "wobbly", even though pins were
perfectly straight! Pinblock had previously checked out in excellent
condition with no loose pins or any signs of problems; all pins were
consitently and adequately tight. Any idea why those few pins came out so
wobbly?
Cheers,
Terry Peterson
Accurate Piano
Service
UniGeezer.com
"Over
50, and not "2" Tired!"
To:
pianotech at ptg.org
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 23:51:36 -0400
From:
wimblees at aol.com
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Steinway L rebuild
question
Terry
Before doing anything drastic, I would measure
the height of the wippen cushions on your Tokiwas wips and compare it with
the height of a S&S wip cushion. I agree with David that the ones you
have are too tall, and cutting off a 1/4" or even 3/8" of felt is not
against the "rules", and would be much easier than reboring the hammers.
Willem (Wim)
Blees, RPT
Piano Tuner/Technician
Mililani, Oahu,
HI
808-349-2943
Author of:
The Business of Piano
Tuning
available from Potter
Press
www.pianotuning.com
-----Original
Message-----
From: pianolover 88 <pianolover88 at hotmail.com>
To:
pianotech at ptg.org
Sent: Fri, Jul 24, 2009 11:07 am
Subject:
[pianotech] Steinway L rebuild question
Hello
all,
I'm rebuilding a Steinway L, circa 1962, and I just finished
replacing all the wipps, hammers, shanks, flanges. All these parts are
Tokiwa, and I must say I'm pretty happy with the quality and fit. For the
hammers I went with abel encore naturals, since I've used these before on
S&S and was very pleased, I did the same here.
My question has to
do with regulating strike distance to 1 3/4". As we know, many pianos have
an adjustable rebound rail. We also know that Steinway d oes NOT. Each
rebound cushion is part of the wippen, and does not have a separate
up/down adjustment. The reason I bring this up, is that now with all new
action parts in place, I find that I must lower the hammers all the way
down, firmly resting on the cushions, but that still only yields
about 1.5" strike distance. I did bench regulate about a half an octave just
to see how it responded at the shortened SD, and it seemed perfectly fine,
but I'd like to get it to proper specs.
I realize that new parts need
breaking in, and the new knuckles will also compress. I tried compressing a
few of the cushions by pressing down on them for about 10 seconds, and that
put me almost to 1 3/4", but they will likely puff up again. So I placed a
box of jiffy weights along the tops (see pic) of a few of them, and if I
leave for a day or so, do you think this will compress them enough to allow
for proper strike distance, and possible even enough to actually get the
shanks at least a bit off the cushions? Or is this not a good idea?
Thanks in advance for any help on this
issue.
Cheers!
Terry Peterson
Accurate Piano Service
UniGeezer.com
"Over 50, and not
"2" Tired!"
Windows Live™
SkyDrive™: Store, access, and share your photos. See
how. =
A
Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See
yours in just 2 easy steps!
Windows Live™
Hotmail®: Search, add, and share the web’s latest sports videos. Check it out.
_________________________________________________________________
Bing™ brings you maps, menus, and reviews organized in one place. Try it now.
http://www.bing.com/search?q=restaurants&form=MLOGEN&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TXT_MLOGEN_Local_Local_Restaurants_1x1
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech.php/attachments/20090725/2d9c7b35/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: DSC01028.JPG
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 80104 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech.php/attachments/20090725/2d9c7b35/attachment-0003.jpeg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: DSC01029.JPG
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 61747 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech.php/attachments/20090725/2d9c7b35/attachment-0004.jpeg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: DSC01030.JPG
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 56826 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech.php/attachments/20090725/2d9c7b35/attachment-0005.jpeg>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC