I purchased a Fujan and several extra parts almost two years ago. I use it every day. However, I don't really notice any difference in stiffness with my old Watanabe that I used for 25 years. The Fujan is nice and I use it for every tuning, but I was somewhat disappointed that I didn't see a great deal more stiffness, especially since others had raved about it. I really like it for the very light weight. My only complaint would be that I would like a larger ball on the end. I had made a 2 3/8" ball for my Watanabe and I found it nicer than the smaller Fujan ball. Terry Beckingham At 06:15 PM 10/21/2009 -0400, you wrote: >The good news, Kevin, is that wonderful things await you in the realm of >improved tuning levers. Â Like brother Porritt, I too have a Fujan >(although mine is more recent, carbon fiber). Â Wow, what an improvement >over what I was previously using! Â The quantum leap in stiffness means >less strain on you and much more nuanced control of the tuning pin. Â As >David says below, once you've tried one of these new innovations, you >won't look back. Â For grands, I look forward to trying Dan Levitan's new >design (much posted about this on the Bechstein B thread that launched >this line of discussion), as soon as Marinelli gets it into production. > >Alan Eder > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Porritt, David <dporritt at mail.smu.edu> >To: caut at ptg.org <caut at ptg.org> >Sent: Wed, Oct 21, 2009 2:29 pm >Subject: Re: [CAUT] Tuning hammer technique and latest tuning hammers >(Kevin Fortenberry) > > >Kevin: > >I bought a Fujan a couple of years ago and have never looked back. Mine >is old >enough that it's the aluminum tube so it's a little heavier than the new >carbon >ones, but it works very well for me. The stiffness. Once you've used a >lever >that stiff, nothing else feels right. > >dp > > >David M. Porritt, RPT ><mailto:dporritt at smu.edu>dporritt at smu.edu > > >-----Original Message----- >From: <mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org>caut-bounces at ptg.org >[mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of >Fortenberry, Kevin >Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 3:34 PM >To: <mailto:caut at ptg.org>caut at ptg.org >Subject: Re: [CAUT] Tuning hammer technique and latest tuning hammers (Kevin >Fortenberry) > >List, I am really enjoying the discussion on hammer technique, and after >reading and thinking about the last post from Fred, I was tuning a >Hamilton in >the bass and switched to my right hand (which I started doing about 10 >years ago >after running into tremendous wrist, elbow and shoulder pain) and noticed >that I >do hold my hammer at 2 to 3 o'clock on many occasions. I also have evolved >over >the years into a very similar technique to what you guys are describing. I >will >continue to observe and try to improve further. Thanks for this! By the way, >after a few months of using both hands to tune, all my pain is gone >(except for >"tuner's neck" of course). > >My question is: I really need to invest in a new hammer, and I thought maybe >some of you could share with the list what hammer/s you like the best and >why. I >am interested in the Jahn extendable from Pianotek; the Charles faulk hammers >seem really nice; and then there are the new carbon fiber shank ones like >Fuyan, >etc. I know this could be a can of worms because everyone has to choose what >works for them, but I would really like to know what some of you all have >selected for use in a real world. I have been using one of 2 hammers, my old >Apsco ext with a ball added on, and a Schaff rosewood ext.-also added a >ball a >few years ago. > >Thanks to all. Kevin Fortenberry >________________________________________________________________ > >Message: 1 >Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 21:34:41 -0400 >From: "Ed Sutton" <<mailto:ed440 at mindspring.com>ed440 at mindspring.com> >Yes, that is correct, and it seems to be important in making the hammer very >rigid. >es > > Subject: Re: [CAUT] Bechstein model B tuning stability > > > If memory serves, no. Part of Dan's approach is to have all joints welded >together for extra rigidity. Can someone else verify this? > > Alan Eder > > > -----Original Message----- > From: David Ilvedson <<mailto:ilvey at sbcglobal.net>ilvey at sbcglobal.net> > > Subject: Re: [CAUT] Bechstein model B tuning stability > > >I remember Dan's article and the photo of the hammer. Seems rather >large...does it break down for transport? > >David Ilvedson, RPT >Pacifica, CA 94044 > >Subject: Re: [CAUT] Bechstein model B tuning stability >On Oct 18, 2009, at 11:07 AM, Ed Sutton wrote: > > >> Fred- > >> > >> The point of Dan Levitan's over-the-stretcher lever is not to > >> "eliminate flagpoling." The point is to eliminate unintentional > >> flagpoling. You are free to control flagpoling in all directions, > >> with or witout rotational forces. > >> > >> In a standard tuning lever, whenever you apply rotational force, you > >> are also applying a certain amount of tilting force, proportional to > >> the "rise" of the handle from the pin in the block, in the direction > >> you are pushing the handle to rotate the pin. > >> > >> In Dan's over-the-stretcher lever, there is no rise, so if you > >> rotate, you only rotate. But you are also free to tilt the pin in > >> any direction, intentionally, not accidentally. It's not at odds > >> with your approach, it's a more controllable version of your approach. > >> > >> Ed > > > OK, fair enough. I "eliminate" the undesired tilt from the equation > >by using a 12 o'clock position (11 to 1, to be precise), meaning the > >tilt is at very close to 90 degrees from the string, and has minimal > >effect on the string. That works well for me. Dan's design is > >intriguing, but would require a major re-learning of technique. Which > >is not necessarily a bad thing. Sometimes starting again from scratch > >is a good way to leave bad habits behind. Dan's design also > >essentially requires the hammer be in line with the string, for > >geometrical reasons (though 6 o'clock instead of 12 for a grand). So > >the technique would be the same - lean the pin towards or away from > >the string for the given purpose. > >Regards, > >Fred Sturm > >University of New Mexico > ><mailto:fssturm at unm.edu>fssturm at unm.edu > > > > > >-------------- next part -------------- >An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >URL: ><<http://ptg.org/pipermail/caut.php/attachments/20091018/6313d3a4/attachment-0001.htm>http://ptg.org/pipermail/caut.php/attachments/20091018/6313d3a4/attachment-0001.htm> > >------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >CAUT mailing list ><mailto:CAUT at ptg.org>CAUT at ptg.org >http://ptg.org/mailman/listinfo/caut > > >End of CAUT Digest, Vol 12, Issue 52 >************************************
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC