Hey Bob For sure the limitations of said instrument, scheduling and budget all play a part in these things don't they. Sure can get complicated at times . Dontchaknowit? Did you ever post the string heights ?. It sounds like a re-measuring party would bring more clarity over all the issues concerned. IE. First and last string height of each section and the center pin heights both hammer flange and wippen center. Current bore distance. An action ratio is always a great number to have and a great place to start. Armed with this the true nature of the deficiencies can be determined and a long term fix can be started provided there is will and budget. If the plate is so out of whack, then a new pinblock and strings are a required and then the action....well ...you'd be rebuilding the major components of the piano but certainly it would be a more economical fix than a new D or even a used one. I tell my boys all the time.....that piano work is a black hole for time,.... which is of course, is why a decisive plan is made and efficient protocols are needed to make sure the pianos repaired correctly we are still making money. I have cut down bass cheek block, moved action holes, trimmed any number of case parts remaking these pianos. Its all Ok.... as long as the out come is assured. I recently took 3 mm off the bass cheekblock of a 1935 D to get the hammers correctly positioned under the strings. Key ends under the under lifters etc. That required moving the blocks locating dowels, hold down screw hole and key slip screw and bending the brass fall board in a bit to keep the fall closing with out rubbing. Interestingly this key slip already had a 3 mm shim on the bottom to raise it up. So someone had been trying to relocate things already. It all came out really well. All that to say we do what we need to do and you are not the only one gnashing his teeth on occasion. :) cheers Dale S. Erwin www.Erwinspiano.com Custom restoration Ronsen Piano hammers Join the Weickert felt Revolution 209-577-8397 209-985-0990 -----Original Message----- From: Bob Maret <itunepiano at aol.com> To: caut at ptg.org Sent: Sun, Feb 13, 2011 7:00 pm Subject: Re: [CAUT] NY hammers/ Hamburg hammers Hi Dale, I don't know the flange height off hand, but I'm effectively raising it by adjusting the glides down. I'll measure it, but I'm not there till next weekend. I shimmed the stack about 2 years ago, using flange center pin height then, but as I recall, I had to limit the distance shimmed because the drop screws rubbed against the pin block in the middle octaves. (there was clearance elsewhere bass and treble) I shimmed the stack about 1/8" in the bass, graduating to nothing at C8. I needed about 1/4" in the middle and couldn't get it due to clearance. Front and back was shimmed the same amount. When I continue to lower the glides further, raising the keys more, the piano plays even better, but I have clearance issues between key top and fall and those drop screws get ever closer. I shim the fall up and I have clearance issues between the fall and stretcher. I've entertained the idea of taking 3/16 " off the bottom of the fall with a table saw.... ha ha. The action is acceptable as it is now, but not perfect. You know, it plays, but doesn't really PLAY......... The hammers I removed have (with wear included) a 2 3/16 bore on # 1 and a 1 7/8 bore on # 88 I'm assuming they are original, but I don't have the history on this. Before shimming the stack, the hammers over-centered. Shimming the stack, for the most part corrected that. Given the plate issues, I probably should have done a custom bore - but that would have waited till summer, and they wanted this done over X mas break when I was jammed with private work. Live and learn! Bob Maret UCF -----Original Message----- From: Dale Erwin <erwinspiano at aol.com> To: caut <caut at ptg.org> Sent: Sun, Feb 13, 2011 9:11 pm Subject: Re: [CAUT] NY hammers/ Hamburg hammers Hi Bob Maybe I miss this, but what is the hammer flange height? Historically It seems to be 145 mm off the keybed. I have restored three Ds from the late 1920s early to mid 30s that have measured 142 mm hammer flange center pin heights. String heights were not unusual. I raised the stack 3 mm on each one resulting in a more usual 3 1/4 bass bore and 2 ish tenor treble. I bore for each sections requirements, hence the ish. Other wise my bore would have been way out of spec, like 3 & 3/8 th and 2 & 1/8 th, plus required longer overall length adding more hammer weight. The geometry worked out well. FWIW, and In my opinion, factory bored hammers as opposed to custom bored hammers is often time wishful thinking. Especially, since the string plane height in general seems to be unreliable from age to age and the agraffe section string plane cannot be depended on as it often rises from note 21 to 50 ish often being 3 mm higher. It is also generally higher than the upper two capo sections. All this to say that one can end up with an action that has grossly under or over centering hammers, inconsistent geometry, regulation etc. as a result. The short story is I don't depend on them being at some kind of close infield standard. Inside the ballpark....maybe, but certainly in my experience something quoted as a N.Y factory standard is not something I can depend on in close tolerance work. Know what I mean? Also I am not being overly critical just explaining what I find every day in my real world and how our shop deals with it. Dale S. Erwin www.Erwinspiano.com Custom restoration Ronsen Piano hammers Join the Weickert felt Revolution 209-577-8397 209-985-0990 -----Original Message----- From: Bob Maret <itunepiano at aol.com> To: caut at ptg.org Sent: Sun, Feb 13, 2011 2:45 pm Subject: Re: [CAUT] NY hammers/ Hamburg hammers Thanks for the squaring info - I'm working on a pre-hung set of Steinway hammers on a 1992 D right now. I don't think this hammer set was pre-lacquered in the factory, given the amount of juice I've used. This D has a high plate as well. I had shimmed the stack for the old hammers and left the shims in for the time being with the new hammers. The action plays ok, but I'm looking for Shigeru Kawai smooth, and it's not that - yet. I wonder if I should remove the shims from under the stack, and re reg the action, now that I have hammers with a bit more meat on them? After all, it must have worked well when brand new, right? I bedded the frame, set key height and dip per spec and it played like a truck. So I lowered the glides to raise the key height 2mm, re set the dip, and it's markedly better, but not quite there. I can't raise the keys much more or there will be fallboard clearance issues, both at the bottom of the fall, and bottom of the stretcher. Besides, I'm already springing the key frame a bit lowering the glides more than spec. By the way, this action has WNG aluminum capstans, due to heavy touch with the old hammers. Bob Maret UCF -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/caut.php/attachments/20110214/7967e9d1/attachment-0001.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC