---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment David, Thanks for the post. >Comments are interspersed - So are mine. :-) At 12:44 PM 02/03/2002 -0600, you wrote: >>I've talked to the shop tech and he told me that he'd had to raise the >>stack some because the hammers weren't hitting correctly. My first >>question is what effect would that have to how the action would then >>have to be regulated? >> > >Avery - My first question would have been, "What do you mean by not >hitting correctly?" Actually, he did. I just phrased it wrong. Sorry. What he meant was that the hammers were overcentering. Not hitting the strings at a 90-degree angle. >And then, did he raise the entire stack (Bill Garlick hates that >term), just the front, or the just the back? I found out this morning what he did. He did raise only the back and he did it by adding app. 3/16" of wood to the back rail that contacts the keybed. The dampers and pedals were moved to compensate for the difference(s). >>OK, now the problems. I had to pull the action Saturday to do something >>or other and accidently discovered that a lot of the hammers are now >>resting on the backchecks. Even to the point of being able to hear a >>noise when they hit and there's no bounce at all on many of them. >>Especially from the upper middle, all the way down to the end. Also, if >>you put your hand on the hammer and slowly press the key, you can feel a >>slight rub on many of them in that area. And no, it's not the tail >>that's rubbing. >> > >Did the flood affect the hammers enough to swell the felt in that >shoulder area? I don't believe so. If it did at all, they went back down as the humidity came back under control. Besides, they also filed the hammers while it was at the dealer's shop. >>I checked a few things and found that the dip is well over 10mm on the >>whites, >> > >10mm is almost exact .390". 11mm is .433". Steinway spec for D is >.390" but manual states that up to .420" is acceptable tolerance for >all models. Is "well over 10mm as much as 11mm? Probably so. However, I found a .420 block and checked it again with that. It's at least that much, plus maybe 1/2 the thickness of the keytop (whites) on the majority of the keys. >>the hammer blow is at least 2", the drop is way too much and >>there is plenty of aftertouch, if not too much in some cases. However >>the basic feel is fairly decent, maybe even on the light side. >>Almost "dangerously light", as Anton put it. >> > >What effect did the humidity have on action centers and key bushings? None that I know of. I've had no problems with any of that. >>If I raise the hammer line to where I normally like to have it (around >>1 3/4" or so, that's going to seriously increase the aftertouch. Even >>raising it to 1 7/8" would cause a problem and I don't think I can >>decrease the dip enough to compensate for that. There's also not enough >>room to be able to lower the whites any. They're already about as low as >>they can be. >> > >Steinway D hammer blow spec is 1 7/8". I am not understanding what >would prevent you from decreasing dip. What I was trying to say here was that since the hammer blow is already app. 2" with plenty of aftertouch, if I raised the hammer line, even to 1-7/8", that would give me even MORE aftertouch, which I don't want. Yes, I can decrease the dip some but I don't know yet if I can decrease it enough to take up all that extra aftertouch and still have enough dip. What do you mean about insufficient room to lower naturals, and why would >you want to? I _don't_ want to. :-) This was just referring to another possible way to decrease the dip and aftertouch. >>That brings me back to my first question. Would raising the stack have >>made these compromises necessary? Especially the excessive hammer blow? >> > >Raising the stack would cause excessive hammer blow if he neglected >to reestablish the proper hammer line after doing so. > >>Any suggestions on what to do to correct the problem(s). >> > >Have you gone back to the dealer yet to thank him for his free help? >Might be interesting. Before you jump in with flippers and air >tank, at 1997, you are at the tail end of a 5 year warrantee period. >If the technician was correct about the hammers not striking >correctly (whatever that means), and it's not reasonably ascribable >to the flood, perhaps the problem was there to begin with, and >should be covered. The warranty thing was one of the reasons he wanted to bring it in. Horacio Gutierrez had picked out 1 D and 5 B's for us in New York but he didn't want anything done to them at the store before they were delivered. So, they never had a chance to really check them out thoroughly. >> I haven't had >>a chance yet to check the backcheck height in relation to letoff. That's >>one possibility but I'm not quite ready to jump in and start >>lowering backchecks just yet, until I know what's really happening >>here. The >>problem was not there before the tech raised the stack. >> >>I'm going to have to get on it this week, so any quick help would be >>greatly appreciated. >> >>P.S. At least they corrected some of the problems with the damper lift, >>even though I don't really like the damping, either. >> > >Why not? They're just not damping as well as I'd like them to. >Best & good luck in a week - Thanks. I'll probably need it. Avery >David Skolnik ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/caut.php/attachments/2f/de/9a/ec/attachment.htm ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC