My turn!

[Delwin D Fandrich]

harvey wrote:

> . . . . The rest of the story:
>
> a. the existing bushings contain [dry] graphite only in the bushing to pin
> contact area. This "coating" is so uniform and symmetrical inside the
> mortices that it appears to be factory, but I can't imagine how (or why) it
> was done;

Jim,

I did work on a lot of Steinways during this period -- early 1970's through
about 1981.  I don't recall ever seeing graphite on the key bushings.  One
thousand three hundred and forty seven key leads, but no graphite.



> b. I don't like graphite, wet or dry, on key bushings;

I agree.  And not liking it as much as I do I should think I'd have noticed if
it were a regular feature of the keysets Steinway was using at the time.


> c. from an aesthetics (only) standpoint, the bushings leave a lot to be
> desired.
>
> Question 1: Is the graphite a stock condition?

No.  I don't think so.  See above.

> Question 2: Does this vintage have unusually ugly key bushing work? It
> looks strangely familiar -- like something that would come from the
> Pratt-Read Clemson division.

Yes.  It had unusually ugly key bushing work.  A lot like you'd expect to see
from Pratt-Read keys.  Yes, there was a connection there.  They were Pratt-Read
keys.  Much, I'm sure, to Steinway's everlasting regret.


> To bush or not to bush... that is the immediate question, at least until
> something else comes up! <g> Oh yes, almost forgot. Let's not consider
> cleaning the graphite as a viable option. I think the results would be
> worse than the existing condition. Speaking of worse, it'll be my luck that
> if I do rebush, I'll find the white thermo-nuclear activated adhesive glop
> holding the bushings in place.

This was a thermal setting glue.  It softens with heat.

Regards,

Del