<!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 } DIV.Section1 { page: Section1 } </STYLE> </HEAD> <BODY lang=EN-US vLink=purple link=blue bgColor=white> <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 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 = 11:29 AM</DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">Subject: RE: [CAUT] Steinway = stack height</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV class=Section1> 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></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HT= ML>