At 9:25 AM +0100 1/22/03, Richard Brekne wrote: >You dont really force the choice either.. but opt for adjusting the >rake then... >I suppose I should have also mentioned that you have to take as >given the hammer >must be on a 90 degree rake. What would you choose then ?? > >Shank parallel to the key bed or hammer hitting the string at 90 degrees ? Let's see. Hammer molding CL square to the string to as to eliminate the option of the hammer wiping the strings as a way of avoid rebound. Hammer molding CL square to the shank to avoid stressing their gue joint. Those I want. Shank parallel to the keybed? What use is that? Not much. Especially when you realize how much more complicated getting all three simultaneously is. The old bore formula has to be modified. You measure the string's inclination, then on paper (or a spreadsheet) create a little triangle, one of whose sides is the line dropped square from the string at the strike point, the second of which is the line drawn over dead level from the hammer center, and the third of which runs from the hammer center to the first line, intersecting it squarely. (This third line should be parallel to the string.) With a little trig, you figure how much the standard bore length (string height at strike point, minus hammer center height) has to be shortened to bring the shank parallel to the string If the hammer must be mounted square, and if it is to hit the string normal, that requires a shank parallel to the string. But given the extra work to calculate the bore and the fact that the string inclination is probably not going to be more than 2-3º, I'd probably go with only the hammer strike being square. Just my opinion, and I'd probably recant if faced with prosecution. Bill Ballard RPT NH Chapter, P.T.G. "I go, two plus like, three is pretty much totally five. Whatever" ...........The new math +++++++++++++++++++++
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC