SW heresy?

[Sarah Fox]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
Hi Bob,

Yes, the weights are SW, and not head weight.  Although my hammers are a =
bit heavy, they're not really *that* heavy.  For the most part, they're =
in the 3/4 medium to top medium range.  I do like a heavier hammer, as =
it seems to give me more dynamic control.  If I had the strength to =
handle them, I'd probably want even heavier hammers still -- perhaps no =
higher than Stanwood 10s.  In contrast, I can't stand playing pianos =
that have light hammers.  Heavy works -- at least for me.  These hammers =
are only slightly heavier than the hammers I already have.  As truly, =
truly horrible as my old hammers are, I do like the "feel" of their =
weight.  Everything else in the action seems fine, and I won't be doing =
any reconfigurations (e.g. moving the capstans).  Oh, yes, the new =
shanks do have just a tad (.5 mm) longer a knuckle placement (18, vs. =
17.5 mm), so that will decrease the new SWR ever-so-slightly, =
compensating somewhat for the ever-so-slightly higher SW.

I've already had these hammers hung and shaped.  The job was done quite =
expertly!  Of course I can tweak the weight here and there with the =
removal of a bit of extra molding.  I don't want to touch the checking =
surfaces, though, as they're very nicely shaped.  I'll probably remove a =
bit from the sides of the tails, and perhaps just a shade from the cove =
side.  For those hammers that need a pinch more weight, I'll probably =
use a bit of lead, per some of the suggestions I've received.

But since this will all be put off until after I see how the hammers =
feel and sound, it's all quite a bit of arm waving right now.  If the =
hammers are really too heavy, which I highly doubt, I can always even =
their weights out towards the lower end of the jags in the SW curve.  =
I'll know more, once my keyframe returns home from its little trip to =
the spa, and I can put some of these pretty hammers into motion!  ;-)

Peace,
Sarah

  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: BobDavis88@aol.com=20
  To: pianotech@ptg.org=20
  Sent: Sunday, August 22, 2004 11:56 PM
  Subject: Re: SW heresy?


  Hello Sarah,

  I was looking over your graph. This is strike weight, right? Not head =
weight? Even so, it looks like it might be unnecessarily porky for a =
Steinway clone. What kind of hammers are they, and have the sides been =
tapered? Head to tail, or just tails? Has any additional coving been =
done?

  As others have mentioned, doing your own tapering with a table saw jig =
like the Spurlock goes a long way toward evening up (and reducing) =
weight. If they are 11 mm wide, they may not need to be, which you can =
check against the string spacing. If they do need to be as wide as =
whatever they are, you can just start the taper at that width.=20

  After tapering, I weigh each head before coving, and can make a 0.1 - =
0.2 gram evening-out adjustment in the weight by varying the cove, =
without having it show.=20

  I think you are wise to put off final adjustments until you can put =
some hammers in the piano and see what kind of weight the action wants, =
as well as what kind of sound you're getting.

  Bob Davis


---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/bb/b2/71/61/attachment.htm

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--