<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1607" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY
style="WORD-WRAP: break-word; webkit-nbsp-mode: space; webkit-line-break: after-white-space"
bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Has anyone tried to find a correlation between
shank radius weight and shank pitch? If not I will try some.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Chris Solliday</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=tcoates1@sio.midco.net href="mailto:tcoates1@sio.midco.net">Tim
Coates</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=caut@ptg.org
href="mailto:caut@ptg.org">College and University Technicians</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, February 17, 2008 10:55
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [CAUT] Shank to Hammer
weight spreadsheet</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>Keith,
<DIV><BR class=webkit-block-placeholder></DIV>
<DIV>Listening and sequencing the shanks is very fast if done correctly.
I don't agree with Grotian's sequencing method. I've been sorting
low pitches to the bass end and high pitches to the top for over twenty years.
One basic principle I follow is a low pitched knock associated with a
movement within the piano reduces power. It is one of the main reasons I
change front rail felt punchings. Hard felt punchings create a low knock
that robs power from the sound. I find the same to be true with the
pitch of the shanks. </DIV>
<DIV><BR class=webkit-block-placeholder></DIV>
<DIV>But as I have said before: to each his own. Grotian does it
their way and that's fine. I know what works for me. </DIV>
<DIV><BR class=webkit-block-placeholder></DIV>
<DIV>Tim Coates</DIV>
<DIV><BR class=webkit-block-placeholder></DIV>
<DIV><BR>
<DIV>
<DIV>On Feb 16, 2008, at 8:07 PM, Keith Roberts wrote:</DIV><BR
class=Apple-interchange-newline>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>My question is, if you are weighing the whole shank and flange, how do
you know the distribution of the difference in weight? If 90% of
the weight difference is from the knuckle through the flange, the SW
wouldn't change much and so the presumed evening out of the weights is not
there. The distribution of the mass could vary from shank to shank at all
the different weights.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I like the idea of listening to the sound of the shanks. A thinner
light shank should produce a higher sound. Very quick too. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Keith Roberts<BR><BR></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>On Feb 16, 2008 5:48 PM, Jon Page <<A
href="mailto:jonpage@comcast.net">jonpage@comcast.net</A>> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">
<DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><FONT face=Arial color=#000000> It takes
too long. Just dry fit the hammers to the shanks</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><FONT face=Arial color=#000000>right after
you've tapered them with the table saw</FONT> ...</BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>I don't think you get the idea. Mating a shank's SW with a</DIV>
<DIV>hammer weight will require less hammer mass alteration</DIV>
<DIV>to achieve a smooth SW curve.</DIV><PRE>--
</PRE>
<DIV><BR>Regards,<BR><BR>Jon
Page</DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>