<!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 6.00.2800.1505" name=GENERATOR> <STYLE>@font-face { font-family: Tahoma; } @font-face { font-family: Book Antiqua; } @page Section1 {size: 8.5in 11.0in; margin: 1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; } P.MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman" } LI.MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman" } DIV.MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman" } A:link { COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline } SPAN.MsoHyperlink { COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline } A:visited { COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline } SPAN.MsoHyperlinkFollowed { COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline } P.MsoAutoSig { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman" } LI.MsoAutoSig { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman" } DIV.MsoAutoSig { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman" } SPAN.emailstyle17 { COLOR: windowtext; FONT-FAMILY: Arial } SPAN.emailstyle19 { COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial } SPAN.EmailStyle20 { COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial } DIV.Section1 { page: Section1 } </STYLE> </HEAD> <BODY lang=EN-US vLink=purple link=blue bgColor=white> <DIV>Eric, I'm sorry I misunderstood you to = say that the string heights were lowered. As far as inducing warping, it is more to = get the middle mounting blocks level or slightly raised in the senter to match = the string heights. The straightness or lack of it may be involved only in = the torque of screwing down the feet to the blocks but I suppose some = radical could bend the thing. BTW have you ever encountered the front mounting higher = than the back? Yes, it has happened from the factory.  Chris Solliday</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">From: <A title=WOLFLEEL@UCMAIL.UC.EDU = href="mailto:WOLFLEEL@UCMAIL.UC.EDU">Wolfley, Eric (wolfleel)</A> </DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">To: <A title=caut@ptg.org href="mailto:caut@ptg.org">'College and University Technicians'</A> = </DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 = 1:55 PM</DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">Subject: RE: [CAUT] Steinway = stack height</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV class=Section1> Chris,   My string = heights are in the 7 1/2” range for the most part (a little higher in the = middle) and the hammerflange centers are at 5 ľ” so the real problem is getting = the 1 ľ” blow distance without peeling the bumper felt off to within 1/8” of the = wood. I’ve dealt with a couple of actions where I would like to raise the rear of = the stack up to avoid the “dreaded repetition lock-up” but have glued = extra felt on the bumpers for the sake of expediency. Do they ever actually = induce warping in the stack at the factory to match the curvature of the = string heights? I’ve never had a stack that rocked on a flat bench or = noticed one that was flexed into a curve on the keyframe.   Eric   <DIV> Eric Wolfley, RPT Supervising Piano Technician College-Conservatory of Music University of Cincinnati</DIV>   -----Original Message----- From: = Chris Solliday [mailto:solliday@ptd.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 = 12:52 PM To: College and = University Technicians Subject: Re: [CAUT] Steinway stack height   <DIV> Eric, the real = relationship in this is of course from the string to the center heights. If  7 = 1/2" is the string height,  correspondingly the hammer center height = should be 5 3/4" which is a difference of 1 3/4" ( a familiar number), so = consequently shouldn't the hammer center height be 5 1/2" if the string height is 7 = 1/4" ? Is this what Mike Mohr means by "the action height is unique..." = and "Maintaining the relationship between... ?" Just a slight caution = regarding lowering the stack height only in the back, it can = result in the dreaded "repetition lock-up." But with your shanks so close to = the cushions it's probably not a problem. I think Pianotek sells different = size rest felts so you can maintain a good relationship to the shank. As = for the straightedge thing it doesn't mean that you should just stand there = forever checking it continuously, however great a relief from our regular = duites this may be, but rather just when setting the two center mounting blocks = and maintaining a slight curve (or not) to match the string heights. = Although it certainly would be a good way to measure warping if you knew = where it had originally been set. Accurate string height measurements = are really key, especially with Steinways, for this kind of work.  Chris</DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: = medium none; PADDING-LEFT: 3pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; MARGIN: 5pt 0in 5pt = 3pt; BORDER-LEFT: black 1.5pt solid; PADDING-TOP: 0in; BORDER-BOTTOM: = medium none"> <DIV> ----- Original Message = ----- </DIV> <DIV style="font-color: black"> From: <A title=WOLFLEEL@UCMAIL.UC.EDU = href="mailto:WOLFLEEL@UCMAIL.UC.EDU">Wolfley, Eric (wolfleel)</A> </DIV> <DIV> To: <A title=caut@ptg.org href="mailto:caut@ptg.org">'College and = University Technicians'</A> </DIV> <DIV> Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 11:29 AM</DIV> <DIV> Subject: RE: [CAUT] Steinway stack height</DIV> <DIV>  </DIV> Thanks Chris and all that replied. I’ll thumbtack the specs to the wall = so I won’t misplace them. I did contact Kent Webb and the current spread = specification is 4 13/32” which translates to 4.40625”   The piano in question is indeed of 1968 vintage (Mr. Purdy) and was = originally Teflon with the big fiber knuckles. I isolated the problem to two = sources: The rear of the stack was 1/16” too high (3 5/16”)…easy = enough, I carefully planed the shoes down. The shank bumpers on the new wippens I want = to use (Tokiwa miracle wipps) are 1/8” higher than the original. We save = a lot of old parts here…it was good to have some samples to check. This = piano had a new soundboard installed a few years ago (before I started here) and = obviously the string heights are lower now than its original = incarnation.   In Chris’s post below I can’t exactly visualize what they are = talking about when they say “continually check for straightness with the = straightedge on top of the hammershank flanges”. My only guess is that if the = mounting blocks aren’t all on the same plane the hammer rail could warp = down or up where a stack bracket is screwed down but it seems like it would = have to be really bad for this to happen.       <DIV> Eric Wolfley, RPT Supervising Piano Technician College-Conservatory of Music University of Cincinnati</DIV>   -----Original Message----- From: Chris Solliday [mailto:solliday@ptd.net] Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 = 5:07 PM To: College = and University Technicians Subject: Re: [CAUT] Steinway = stack height   <DIV> "B" at note 62 in NYC = hammer flange 5 3/4"</DIV> <DIV> rep flange 3 = 1/4"  based on string height of 7 1/2"    you didn't say if pre 84 = or post or the new incarnation but the spread pre 84 was  4.381" and = post 84 was 4.395"  This may have changed on the latest and greatest = and for that I suggest you call Kent Webb or email him.  I think = it is important to note that according to Mike Mohr's Forefinishing Notes, = which I consider a reliable source, "Set Action Frame Height" = says "IMPORTANT NOTE: the action stack height, as determined by the thickness = of the mounting blocks. This action height is unique for each = instrument, and is the result of the individual string height for a piano. String = height variables are the result of the plate fitting and belly = operations... String heights change from bass to treble usually in an arched or = crowned manner. These numbers for note # 62 represent an average. = Maintaining the relationship between the stack height and the string height ensures: = A) the proper BLOW distance at the same time the hammershank is properly = off the cushion. and B) the proper HAMMER ROTATION is needed to minimize overstriking or shallow striking conditon. NOTE; if string height is = lower or higher than above, keep the relationship the same..." (and later = after shimming or planing the bass and treble mounting blocks) = "continually check for straightness with the straightedge on top of the hammershank = flanges." I know you only asked for numbers, but what the heck, I felt like = sharing. BTW I'm sure you remember that we discovered when shimming or planning = it is best to rotate the stack on the hammer flange pin axis which means = adjusting the front foot differently than the back foot. Of course there are = even greater subtleties to this process but then you did just ask for the = numbers. Stay well, Chris = Solliday  </DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: = medium none; PADDING-LEFT: 3pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; MARGIN: 5pt 0in 5pt = 3pt; BORDER-LEFT: black 1.5pt solid; PADDING-TOP: 0in; BORDER-BOTTOM: = medium none"> <DIV> ----- Original = Message ----- </DIV> <DIV style="font-color: black"> From: <A title=WOLFLEEL@UCMAIL.UC.EDU = href="mailto:WOLFLEEL@UCMAIL.UC.EDU">Wolfley, Eric (wolfleel)</A> </DIV> <DIV> To: <A title=caut@ptg.org = href="mailto:'caut@ptg.org'">'caut@ptg.org'</A> </DIV> <DIV> Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 9:53 AM</DIV> <DIV> Subject: [CAUT] Steinway stack height</DIV> <DIV>  </DIV> Hi = All,   I’m sure somebody = out there knows the specs for the distance from the keybed to hammerflange = center and keybed to wippen center for a Steinway B. I have these written = down somewhere but can’t find them and I don’t trust my memory. = I’m correcting a problematic action and believe the stack to be too high since to = get the proper blow distance the shank cushions have been reduced to nubs. = The bore distance of the hammers is correct and the string heights are = in the normal range.   Thanks!   Eric Wolfley, RPT Supervising Piano Technician College-Conservatory of Music University of Cincinnati  </BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></BLOCKQUOT= E></BODY></HTML>