Chickering by Baldwin

[Ron Nossaman]

>List: from Sy Zabrocki
>
>TOPIC: Tuning pins too close to plate.
>This week I tuned a new Chickering grand by Baldwin. Somewhere about octave
five there is a section plate break. The first three tuning pins in the
third section are so close to the plate the tuning hammer tip cannot be
inserted over the pin. Fortunately I had a slim wall hammer tip extension
and was able to tune these three pins. It is obvious the tuning pin holes
were drilled off to the side instead in the center of the plate hole. (No
plate bushings).
>

* Being able to produce a piano so that the tuner can get a hammer on the
tuning pins is, IMHO, a pretty minimal manufacturing requirement. I feel
that, if a normal tuning tip can't be put on the pin, that note was never
intended to be tuned. If the customer finds that a difficult concept to
swallow, it's time to call the manufacturer to make it right or replace it. 



>My thoughts about the Chickering were negative although it was only a
4'10".  I believe he would have been better off with almost any Asian piano.
You would not see such a flaw in any Japanese or Korean piano. Some tuner at
Baldwin must have noticed this problem and did nothing about it.

* Probably correct.


>
>You can't easily move pins away from the plate. I thought of just just
bending the pins . . . and then wait for them to break.
>
>Oh well, all in a week's work.
>
>Sy Zabrocki--RPT

Interestingly enough (well, I was interested), I've seen this done, though
I've not done it myself (honest). It looks pretty shabby, but it does seem
to work on a broad axe and dynamite sort of level. I don't think that
bending pins will necessarily increase the likelihood of future breakage,
since I've tuned a lot of bent pins without having one break, but it sure is
ugly, and shouldn't be necessary in a new piano.


 Ron