Pinning on new flanges

[Carl Meyer]

I recall Standwoods adjustable flange. A very small set screw on top of each
side of the flange bearing on the felt.  I'm sure this was effective,
however I suspect since the pressure was at one spot it wouldn't be long
lasting.  Also, to adjust these would require each screw to have the same
friction.  That would be difficult or at least time consuming to adjust.

The squares and other old pianos had a single screw that controlled the
friction.  It was clamping the felt around the center of the pin rather than
having two felt bushings out at the ends of the pin. I too, thought that was
a great idea and wondered why Stanwood abandoned his adjustable flange.  I
see many pros and cons.  And then economics rears it's ugly head.  And when
emotions and bias gets into the picture your dead.

There are two areas in pianos that I think are really archaic.  Action
centers are one.  The other is bridge pin terminations. No, I'm not talking
about Wapin. I stay awake at night agonizing over those problems.  If I get
any good ideas, I won't get credit except posthumously, I suppose.

Carl Meyer Ptg assoc
Santa Clara, Ca.



Original Message ----- 
From: "Farrell" <mfarrel2@tampabay.rr.com>
To: "Pianotech" <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2004 4:28 AM
Subject: Re: Pinning on new flanges


> Or step back into the old box. I don't recall ever hearing a good
> explanation of why the screw-adjustable felt-bushed hammer shank flange is
> not popular. Anyone got a take on that? I'm talking about the kind you
> commonly find on large American square grands. I know David Stanwood also
> experimented with them in his early action-metrology years.
>
> Seems to me like such a perfect solution.
>
> Terry Farrell
>
> Sarah Fox wrote:
>
> > But stepping outside the box, for a second, there's a problem of getting
> > stuck in the groove of trying to optimize a technology that can only do
> just
> > so much.  Should we not be focusing on how to create tight, rigid, hard,
> > frictionless, noiseless, easily serviceable bearings, rather than using
> the
> > same ol' technology of packing an oversized wooden hole with enough
> padding
> > to take up the slack and not be *too* heavy in friction, seeking to find
> the
> > optimal comprimise the is the least of all evils?  Bushing cloth may not
> be
> > the best material!  While hard bearings may be noisy, they are only
noisy
> if
> > they are loose.  The problem with Steinway's Teflon blunder was the
> > loosening of the Teflon in the wooden hole with humidity changes.
> > Conceivably, with wear, there could also be a problem with noise and
> runout
> > (slop), as the Teflon holes wear larger.  Considering these things,
> wouldn't
> > the best long-range solution be to figure out a way to fix the bushing
> mount
> > problem -- to make the mount more resistant to deterioration from
humidity
> > changes and, moreover, make the bushings very easily, quickly, and
cheaply
> > replaceable?  What if all the hammer bushings could be replaced in the
> > course of a half hour, without the need for painstaking fitting and
> > refitting?  What if total replacement of bushings were done every, say,
> 5-20
> > years (depending on usage), at a cost to the owner of perhaps $100.
Isn't
> > that where we should be headed?
> >
> > Peace,
> > Sarah
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives