This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
Hi Tom. Thanks for your input. Comments below:
Tom Servinsky wrote:
Are these original parts, except for the hammers?=20
No. Newish (few years old) hammers, shanks, knuckles, flanges, wippens.
Original keybushings with well worn key pin grooves.=20
Yes.
Original wippens with excessive saddle/ capstan grooves?
New.
Pinning?
If anything much of it is loose - what we looked at - didn't fully =
evaluate.
Verdi Gris?
No.
Too many times action geometry concerns are confused with the basics. =
Excessive friction from the keybushings/ keypin relationship can affect =
the outcome dramatically. My advise before any drilling and leading is =
considered would be to thoroughly lubricate all contact =
points...keypins, capstan, knuckles, jack tops, and even the keybushings =
and wippen saddle cushions.
I assure you that your findings will change dramatically.
Incidentally, a tip that I picked up from my last Steinway factory =
seminar was centered around this issue. The techs are now lubricating =
the keybushing felt and wippen saddle cushions with Protek Pro Lube, in =
addition to lubricating the keypins and capstans. The differences in =
release are outstanding.
Remember: measure twice cut once!
No doubt, friction is an issue with this action, but the keys are =
relatively free and many notes have normal friction. On the few high =
friction notes we put the long-distance knuckles on, friction came right =
down to 12 grams or so. So yes, friction needs to be addressed on this =
action because it is erratic, but with five leads in the keys, FWs that =
exceed the Stanwood ceilings, and an action ratio upwards of 7, it seems =
clear this action needs a bit more than friction management.
Thanks though. Some good point.
BTW: What is a wippen saddle cushion? Is that a different term for the =
heel cushion?
Terry Farrell
Hello Action Balancing Aficionados,
Today I spent a good part of the day with Phil Bondi (who is =
currently dodging thunderstorms along southbound I-75) diagnosing an =
1880s S&S model A 85-note action that plays like a Mack truck.
Because two heads are better than one, and as we found out, they are =
likely better by an exponential function, we have at least four times as =
many unanswered questions as either one of us could have come up with =
working alone!
We actually did improve one thing right off. The drop screws were =
turned WAY down to make the pathetically hung crap hammers check - sort =
of. They were so far down that the rep levers were being depressed at =
less than half blow. We turned them up and that made quite a difference =
right away. But still, the action was sluggish.
We measured upweight (UW), downweight (DW), key ratio (KR), strike =
weight (SW), wippen weight (WW), knuckle-to-center distance (KC) and =
front weight (FW) on all the Cs and C#s. Our objective is to =
characterize what changes can be made to this action to make for a =
normal to light touchweight. All results discussed herein are in grams =
and millimeters.
We also examined magic lines and did the measurements to calculate =
overall action ration as specified by Ron Overs.
The action had shanks with knuckles 15.7 mm away from the flange =
center pin (is that the right distance Phil?). And it had five leads in =
the bass keys and two in the trebles.
The capstan/wip-heel actually intersected the magic line just after =
key travel started (not too horribly bad). The knuckle/rep-lever =
interface started at a full knuckle below the line and ended with the =
line about half-way across the knuckle at full key depression (pretty =
bad).
For anyone interested in a painful experience, I will send you my =
spreadsheet with all the data upon request. For those others more =
sensible, but still reading this, I will summarize below:
DW ranged from 49 to 63. UW ranged from 18 to 28, friction (F) =
ranged from 12 to 19.5 balance weight (BW) ranged from 34 to 45.5,=20
What would make the BW so inconsistent?
FWs are from at Stanwood's Front Weight Ceilings to about 4g over, =
KR is .55 for naturals and .53 for sharps, average WW is 16.5, SW ranged =
from heavy-medium in the treble to just into the light zone in the bass, =
action ratio (R) ranged from 6.7 to 7.5 and averaged 7.1.
Clearly, the leverage of this action is horrible - too high. We =
experimented with a 17mm and 16.5mm knuckle-to-centerpin distance =
knuckles/shanks. They seemed to function very well - you could regulate =
the notes quite well (we tried the 17mm on one note and the 16.5 on four =
notes). However, the improved leverage dropped all the DWs to around 41 =
and all the UW to about 16 or 18g.=20
Looking for a bit of input here - this is too light, yes? Too light =
DW and the low UW will produce poor repetition, yes?=20
Friction on the high friction notes dropped to 12 or so and BW =
dropped to 28 to 30. Calculated R goes from and average of 7.1 to 6.2 =
with the 16.5mm knuckles - likely down to about 6.0 with the 17mm =
knuckles.
Using the Overs action ratio method (we did not do actual =
measurements with the 16.5mm knuckles) I estimate that the knuckle =
change would drop the action ratio down from the original average of 6.4 =
to 5.9
BUT, these keys have a whole bunch of lead in them. We are thinking =
that, at a minimum, this action needs the knuckles placed out at 17mm =
from the flange center pins to improve leverage. Then, that will allow =
one or two leads to be removed from each key - remove enough lead to =
make the DWs in the 50 gram range and the upweights will gain a similar =
amount - around 10 grams or so and end up with about 27g UW.
Ultimately, I think, this piano needs a complete releading (setting =
gradational FWs) new hammers, shanks, knuckles and flanges and =
gradational SWs (on some nice SW curve).
Don't know exactly what the piano owner will be willing to do - =
apparently it is a not-so-well-to-do church. Phil has the action at this =
point to evaluate it.
Anyone care to comment on our thinking here? Neither one of us are =
experienced with this balancing methodology enough to decide exactly =
what to do on our own. And we recognize that maybe we need to do a bunch =
more measuring also. But we have a start.=20
We'll be very interested in input. Thanks.
Terry Farrell
(I wonder if Phil managed to drive the 135 miles home in the time I =
took me to write this email?) :-(
---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/96/e9/d4/63/attachment.htm
---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC