Doug, In a grand the repetition spring doesn't affect the normal touchweight measurements. You don't feel the spring tension until you get to let-off. The new hammers are the obvious suspect. If the shanks have been replaced the action ratio may have changed. Did it regulate normally with normal key dip and blow distance? Did you get some upweight measurements too, to confirm that its not a friction problem? -Ryan On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 6:57 AM, Douglas Gregg <classicpianodoc at gmail.com>wrote: > I am working on a school Baldwin 5" 8" BG from 1929 that was restored > by someone else about 5 years ago. Restored is a stretch, but they put > in a lot of new parts. New action, hammers, dampers, keycovers, bass > strings, and refinished the plate. Lots of parts but no adjustments. > No voicing or regulation was done. > > I have it regulated now but the action is heavy, about 65 to 70 grams > down weight throughout. I am thinking that part of it might be due to > the repetition spring tension. This has one spring attached under the > repetition lever with the other end pushing down on the back of the > jack. To get the repetition lever to bump the hammer up slightly, it > puts quite a bit of spring pressure on the back of the jack. This > might be contributing to the heavyness. My question is if this is > likely and if there is some way around this. If I reduce the spring > pressure on the jack, it will sacrifice the repetition lever strength. > Any suggestions. > > Perhaps it could be cured with a Touch Rail, but this is not a big budget > job. > > Doug Gregg > Classic Piano Doc > -- Ryan Sowers, RPT Puget Sound Chapter Olympia, WA www.pianova.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20110906/428914b8/attachment.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC