---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment Ola, You will no doubt observe that the hammer rest rail is NOT adjustable. The hammer was not designed to rest on the rail. Rather, the spring which you removed and then put back must be adjusted until it suspends the hammer at just the right distance (the most difficult part of the regulation, and worse than butterfly springs). You will then get double escapement, which is not possible if the spring is too weak. The spring functions, in effect, like a repetition lever. Regulation specs are available from Bluthner. Also search in the archives under "Bluthner patent action" or just "Bluthner." Paul S. Larudee, RPT Richmond, CA Allan Sutton wrote: > Very unusual piano...I have figured that the hammer have to REST on > its rest. Allan Sutton > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Ola Andersson > To: pianotech@ptg.org > Sent: Friday, January 05, 2001 5:14 PM > Subject: Bluthner 1916 action > Hi everybody I regulated a Bluthner Grand today from 1916. > It has a "one legged spider" sitting on each jack,anybody > knows wich one I'm talking about? The only way to regulate > the hammer hight and letoff was to remove the springs in the > front.Afterwards I put the springs back to regulate the > dip.I couldn't regulate the hammer height in the bass > because the hammers would break in the pinblocktaking the > action in and out if I raised them so they are still resting > on the Hammer rest. I can remember a discussion of an action > like this. Can anybody remember a key word for the > archives? Any comments? Would I done it another way? It's > still in the shop so I can change it. Wondering Ola > Andersson > ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/08/40/79/1e/attachment.htm ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC