[CAUT] hammer line

[Ron Nossaman]

> I was just composing a similar post in my mind when I read Chris' post
> below. I too have had far fewer strike-point issues since I have been
> calibrating strikeweights and have wondered for a while about the
> relationship between soundboard stiffness, hammer mass/hardness, and
> strikepoint. As a case in point, I've recently finished a Precision
> Touch Design on a private client's Steinway D which had a crazy
> hammerline dip (it looked like Alan's picture) at the beginning of the
> first capo section which was the result of a previous technician's
> efforts to shore up a weakness in that area. I looked at the V-bar
> termination and the bridge and saw no reason for such a
> maneuver...everything was nice and straight and even. So when I hung the
> new hammers I kept the hammerline nice and straight as well and lo and
> behold, there were no strikepoint issues. I am interested in
> experimenting with the riblets and soundboard weights that have been in
> the news lately and how that technique will interact with hammer mass
> adjustments. It is my guess that this will eliminate some strikepoint
> issues as well.
> 
> Eric

I've found something a little different. I used to set hammer 
strike point below C-8 by trial, and ended up with the bulge 
in the strike line through the killer octave. Since I started 
doing soundboard design work, I've found this to be 
unnecessary. C-8 strike point is still determined by trial, 
but I find it's considerably less critical than with the 
original design, and by the time you get to the killer octave, 
deviating from the straight line makes no real difference. The 
target is much wider with an efficient soundboard assembly. So 
I think it's very much, if not entirely, a soundboard response 
thing. Though I don't know the details of how and why it does 
this, there is most certainly a difference.

Ron N