---------------------- multipart/mixed attachment David, You did send a correction. Unfortunately I responded to the first= =20 e-mail before reading the second. Best, Greg At 04:48 PM 5/12/2003, you wrote: >I thought I sent a correction on that, maybe I sent it to myself by >mistake. Of course, you are right. I meant 7/32". > >David Love >davidlovepianos@earthlink.net > > > > [Original Message] > > From: Greg Newell <gnewell@ameritech.net> > > To: Pianotech <pianotech@ptg.org>; <davidlovepianos@earthlink.net> > > Date: 5/12/2003 10:49:13 AM > > Subject: RE: hammer mass (was Wurzen felt) > > > > David, > > Not to be too pickyune but I do hope you meant a 7/32" shank >and=3D20 > > not 7/16". > > > > Greg > > > > > > > > At 01:32 PM 5/12/2003, you wrote: > > > > >Yes, it seems that it is not a pure test. It was interesting, however, >to > > >observe the difference. It brings something else to mind, which is= what > > >happens when, say, a new action with 7/16" shanks is combined with a >hammer > > >weight from the original design which utilized 3/16" shanks and of a > > >different species of wood. My own experience does suggest that a light > > >hammer on a 3/16" maple shank does not sound the same as that same= hammer > > >on a hex 7/16" shank made of hornbeam. > > > > > >David Love > > >davidlovepianos@earthlink.net > > > > Greg Newell > > Greg's piano Fort=3DE9 > > mailto:gnewell@ameritech.net=3D20 > > > >_______________________________________________ >pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives Greg Newell Greg's piano Fort=E9 mailto:gnewell@ameritech.net=20 ---------------------- multipart/mixed attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC