David Love asked: "Encountered a Steinway c1960's today. Had been converted from Teflon to Renner action. Overall, the stack is too high. Center pin to key bed is 5 7/8"+. Shanks are on the rest cushions with just about exactly 1 3/4" blow. Shanks can rebound into the balancier screw with certain types of staccato touch. Capstans are screw up far too high. Looking for an efficient way to cut down the key frame rests for the stack feet and lower the stack by about 1/8"+. Any suggestions? " There are a few ways I can think of: Route the frame. Take every thing off the frame. Set up a track for a small router, ( I use a B&D Laminate trimmer for this sort of thing...bridges too.<G)> Route to your predetermined height. Or,....Take everything off of the stack frame. Turn the frame upside down and mill the feet. You may need to do both. Another option, would be to cut off the wippen feet and put a shorter one, that would put the magic line where it should be. Or, could be a combination of all. BTW, I've found that the Renner wippen foot, is inefficient, friction-wise. I usually make it curved instead of the "routed"; replace felt and stretch it in the application.. You'd be amazed a how much friction there is because of that loose weave, loosey goosey felt on the originals.<G> Just my take on it. Joe > [Original Message] > From: <pianotech-request at ptg.org> > To: <pianotech at ptg.org> > Date: 10/9/2012 9:43:50 PM > Subject: pianotech Digest, Vol 48, Issue 15 > > Send pianotech mailing list submissions to > pianotech at ptg.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > pianotech-request at ptg.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > pianotech-owner at ptg.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of pianotech digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Eastein. (Kazuo Yoshizaki) > 2. Re: Eastein. (tnrwim at aol.com) > 3. Baldwin D Keyslip (Patrick C. Poulson) > 4. Lowering the stack on a Steinway (David Love) > 5. Re: Hammer Blow (David Love) > 6. Re: Lowering the stack on a Steinway (Dale Erwin) > 7. Re: Hammer Blow (Dale Erwin) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 16:34:54 -0400 > From: Kazuo Yoshizaki <matrasimca at gmail.com> > To: pianotech at ptg.org > Subject: Re: [pianotech] Eastein. > Message-ID: > <CAJTno16Y3h9QivgvrP6A27mLzaGF6=bUn4VedvZevjwyTO1-Dw at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > The Eastein piano company was established in 1949 by Shinichi Matsuo. > His pianos were all hand crafted and considered to be high quality in > Japan, but the company declared bankruptcy twice in 1973 and in 1990. > The Eastein piano design was influenced by Bluthner. > > Yoshi > > On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 8:55 PM, <tnrwim at aol.com> wrote: > > Any ever heard of this brand? It's a 60". Studio, guessing about 15 years old. Good sound. Could be a Yamaha or European. > > > > Wim > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 18:01:03 -0400 (EDT) > From: tnrwim at aol.com > To: pianotech at ptg.org > Subject: Re: [pianotech] Eastein. > Message-ID: <8CF7480B55904AA-76C-240AE at webmail-d084.sysops.aol.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > Thanks, Yoshi, for that information. I thought the piano looked European, but with a Japanese influence. Your descriptions fits the bill perfectly > The customer got the piano from a Japanese song writer, who died recently. > > Willem > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Kazuo Yoshizaki <matrasimca at gmail.com> > To: pianotech <pianotech at ptg.org> > Sent: Tue, Oct 9, 2012 10:35 am > Subject: Re: [pianotech] Eastein. > > > The Eastein piano company was established in 1949 by Shinichi Matsuo. > His pianos were all hand crafted and considered to be high quality in > Japan, but the company declared bankruptcy twice in 1973 and in 1990. > The Eastein piano design was influenced by Bluthner. > > Yoshi > > On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 8:55 PM, <tnrwim at aol.com> wrote: > > Any ever heard of this brand? It's a 60". Studio, guessing about 15 years > old. Good sound. Could be a Yamaha or European. > > > > Wim > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: <https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20121009/45a538b2/attac hment-0001.htm> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 16:28:40 -0700 > From: "Patrick C. Poulson" <pcpoulson at sbcglobal.net> > To: <pianotech at ptg.org> > Subject: [pianotech] Baldwin D Keyslip > Message-ID: <3D7580C585A84C258387352230DDBF9A at PatrickPC> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=original > > Hello all: is it possible to get case parts from Baldwin these days? My > church is going to start using a black D that is missing its keyslip. It > also is overly bright in the mid-treble, but I don't think the two issues > are related. > Patrick C. Poulson > Registered Piano Technician > 530-265-1983 > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 19:08:10 -0700 > From: "David Love" <davidlovepianos at comcast.net> > To: <pianotech at ptg.org> > Subject: [pianotech] Lowering the stack on a Steinway > Message-ID: <01a601cda68c$1920baa0$4b622fe0$@net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Encountered a Steinway c1960's today. Had been converted from Teflon to > Renner action. Overall, the stack is too high. Center pin to key bed is > 5 7/8"+. Shanks are on the rest cushions with just about exactly 1 3/4" > blow. Shanks can rebound into the balancier screw with certain types of > staccato touch. Capstans are screw up far too high. Looking for an > efficient way to cut down the key frame rests for the stack feet and lower > the stack by about 1/8"+. Any suggestions? > > There are other issues with this action as well that I will need to address. > Leverage is very high. Original shank swapped out to 16.5 knuckle hanging. > Wippen assist springs were employed and in the upper part of the piano the > hammer tails contact the assist springs on a hard blow. Hammers are too > heavy even with the assist spring for this action (have yet to do a complete > analysis). However, the stack, I'm convinced, must be lowered no matter > what. > > David Love > www.davidlovepianos.com > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 19:12:11 -0700 > From: "David Love" <davidlovepianos at comcast.net> > To: <pianotech at ptg.org> > Subject: Re: [pianotech] Hammer Blow > Message-ID: <01ac01cda68c$a883bad0$f98b3070$@net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > They do produce more easy to determine dip distance but I find them > generally way too hard. A little give in the punching I find desirable for > the sake of the pianist's finger and often for the sake of noise and key > thumping. Our ability to set precise dip by having a punching that doesn't > compress is secondary, moreover, unimportant. You don't play the piano by > setting dip. > > > > David Love > > www.davidlovepianos.com > > > > From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf > Of Paul Williams > Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2012 7:14 AM > To: pianotech at ptg.org > Subject: Re: [pianotech] Hammer Blow > > > > I've been also using the crescendo punchings for the past couple years and > love working with them.waaaay more consistent results. > > > > Paul > > > > > > From: Dale Erwin <erwinspiano at aol.com> > Reply-To: "pianotech at ptg.org" <pianotech at ptg.org> > Date: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 8:51 AM > To: "pianotech at ptg.org" <pianotech at ptg.org> > Subject: Re: [pianotech] Hammer Blow > > > > Hi Floyd > > Dittos on Jons post. > > > > And just the squish factor of the avergae supply house front punching > changes the feel and amount of overall dip/aftertouch based on touch > pressure. They squish as much as .035 compared to .015 for Jurgens crescendo > punchings. If you're looking for more precision in key dip/aftertouch its > only logical use the latter to reduce errors from variables > > Dale Erwin R.P.T. > Erwin's Piano Restoration Inc. > Mason & Hamlin/Steinway/U.S. pianos > www.Erwinspiano.com > Phone: 209-577-8397 > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jon Page <jonpage at comcast.net> > To: pianotech <pianotech at ptg.org> > Sent: Tue, Oct 9, 2012 4:29 am > Subject: Re: [pianotech] Hammer Blow > > >This week I'm going to see what happens to my hammer line if I set > hammer blow to achieve a specified amount of aftertouch. I've set the > key height, >key dip and letoff. I'll put the action in the piano, use a > .045 punching with a notch cut out so I can slide it onto the front > rail pin over the cloth >punching with the key installed, and set the > hammer blow for each of the white keys such that a weight on the key (I > forget how many grams, and I'm >not in the shop to check) brings it > almost to let-off, and a slight downward tap on the key will take it > through let-off. Theoretically, the straightness of >the hammer line I > achieve with this procedure should allow me to evaluate how successful I > was in setting even key dip and consistent aftertouch. > > Your hammer line will become erratic by doing this because of the > slightly different Key Ratios between notes. That procedure is what you > do to set an even touch with a priority given to aftertouch. But to do > this, you alter the dip not the blow distance. Keys level, hammer line > level, key dip slightly uneven. The pianist feels a even aftertouch and > not an uneven key dip. Altering the blow on an individual basis will > introduce volume discrepancies brought on by varying blow distances. > > Aftertouch calibration by varying dip slightly is essential to a smooth > feeling action. > > -- > Regards, > > Jon Page > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: <https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20121009/72426839/attac hment-0001.htm> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 00:24:30 -0400 (EDT) > From: Dale Erwin <erwinspiano at aol.com> > To: pianotech at ptg.org > Subject: Re: [pianotech] Lowering the stack on a Steinway > Message-ID: <8CF74B646987BFC-1CD0-280BF at webmail-d037.sysops.aol.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > David > Its sound like your stack is at leas 2 mm high. Anymore than that and it will scrape the bottom of the pinblock. > I am working on 1950s B action where the hammer center to keybed was 142 mm. From experience 145 is the usual standard. I shimmed it up to spec. It had the opposite problems of yours. Shanks too high off rest felts,capstans buried, bore distance to short, hammers way overcentering. > Shimming is easier than removing. I think last time I used a small laminate trimmer to take the cleats down & then cleaned it up with a very sharp chisel. Or just use a sharp chisel. If you get to low shimming will solve the rest of the elevation issues. > > > > Dale Erwin R.P.T. > Erwin's Piano Restoration Inc. > Mason & Hamlin/Steinway/U.S. pianos > www.Erwinspiano.com > Phone: 209-577-8397 > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: David Love <davidlovepianos at comcast.net> > To: pianotech <pianotech at ptg.org> > Sent: Tue, Oct 9, 2012 7:08 pm > Subject: [pianotech] Lowering the stack on a Steinway > > > Encountered a Steinway c1960's today. Had been converted from Teflon to > Renner action. Overall, the stack is too high. Center pin to key bed is > 5 7/8"+. Shanks are on the rest cushions with just about exactly 1 3/4" > blow. Shanks can rebound into the balancier screw with certain types of > staccato touch. Capstans are screw up far too high. Looking for an > efficient way to cut down the key frame rests for the stack feet and lower > the stack by about 1/8"+. Any suggestions? > > There are other issues with this action as well that I will need to address. > Leverage is very high. Original shank swapped out to 16.5 knuckle hanging. > Wippen assist springs were employed and in the upper part of the piano the > hammer tails contact the assist springs on a hard blow. Hammers are too > heavy even with the assist spring for this action (have yet to do a complete > analysis). However, the stack, I'm convinced, must be lowered no matter > what. > > David Love > www.davidlovepianos.com > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: <https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20121010/9c0a9ac8/attac hment-0001.htm> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 00:43:39 -0400 (EDT) > From: Dale Erwin <erwinspiano at aol.com> > To: pianotech at ptg.org > Subject: Re: [pianotech] Hammer Blow > Message-ID: <8CF74B8F39A6C3C-1CD0-28151 at webmail-d037.sysops.aol.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > You don?t play the piano by setting dip. Not sure what this means. > Our ability to set precise dip by having a punching that doesn't compress is secondary, moreover, unimportant. > I think it is important > The amount of aftertouch varies by touch force. The key has to find a bottom at some point. and that bottom is the end of the squish. After the jack has entered let-off phase it enters aftertouch phase or esacpement from the knuckle. As the punching squish happens the jack is moving at varying distances from the knuckle depending on touch force, which is affecting repetition to one degree or another. > If I am setting a .390 dip & I have a punching with .035 squish then my precisely set dip is meaningless as my total key travel can now be as much as .425. Too deep in my practice > Also my opinion is that more energy is going into the felt and the keybed and less into the hammer string contact time. > > > I find pianist who like the feel of actions set up with crescendos. The response this action is really even. I've had both feed backs. The really mushy ones I find objectionable, the touch feels undefined somehow. > On some pianos there is too much thump noise migrates thru the keybed. In one case I removed them for that cause. > By the way what do you'all use in terms of woven punching that might be a bit firmer. I've liked some from Piano-tek > Dale > > > Dale Erwin R.P.T. > > > > > They do produce more easy to determine dip distance but I find them generally way too hard. A little give in the punching I find desirable for the sake of the pianist?s finger and often for the sake of noise and key thumping. Our ability to set precise dip by having a punching that doesn?t compress is secondary, moreover, unimportant. You don?t play the piano by setting dip. > > > David Love > www.davidlovepianos.com > > > > From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Paul Williams > Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2012 7:14 AM > To: pianotech at ptg.org > Subject: Re: [pianotech] Hammer Blow > > > > I've been also using the crescendo punchings for the past couple years and love working with them?waaaay more consistent results. > > > > Paul > > > > > > From: Dale Erwin <erwinspiano at aol.com> > Reply-To: "pianotech at ptg.org" <pianotech at ptg.org> > Date: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 8:51 AM > To: "pianotech at ptg.org" <pianotech at ptg.org> > Subject: Re: [pianotech] Hammer Blow > > > > > Hi Floyd > > Dittos on Jons post. > > > > And just the squish factor of the avergae supply house front punching changes the feel and amount of overall dip/aftertouch based on touch pressure. They squish as much as .035 compared to .015 for Jurgens crescendo punchings. If you're looking for more precision in key dip/aftertouch its only logical use the latter to reduce errors from variables > > Dale Erwin R.P.T. > Erwin's Piano Restoration Inc. > Mason & Hamlin/Steinway/U.S. pianos > www.Erwinspiano.com > Phone: 209-577-8397 > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jon Page <jonpage at comcast.net> > To: pianotech <pianotech at ptg.org> > Sent: Tue, Oct 9, 2012 4:29 am > Subject: Re: [pianotech] Hammer Blow > > >This week I'm going to see what happens to my hammer line if I set > hammer blow to achieve a specified amount of aftertouch. I've set the > key height, >key dip and letoff. I'll put the action in the piano, use a .045 punching with a notch cut out so I can slide it onto the front > rail pin over the cloth >punching with the key installed, and set the > hammer blow for each of the white keys such that a weight on the key (I > forget how many grams, and I'm >not in the shop to check) brings it > almost to let-off, and a slight downward tap on the key will take it > through let-off. Theoretically, the straightness of >the hammer line I > achieve with this procedure should allow me to evaluate how successful I > was in setting even key dip and consistent aftertouch. > > Your hammer line will become erratic by doing this because of the > slightly different Key Ratios between notes. That procedure is what you > do to set an even touch with a priority given to aftertouch. But to do > this, you alter the dip not the blow distance. Keys level, hammer line > level, key dip slightly uneven. The pianist feels a even aftertouch and > not an uneven key dip. Altering the blow on an individual basis will > introduce volume discrepancies brought on by varying blow distances. > > Aftertouch calibration by varying dip slightly is essential to a smooth > feeling action. > > -- > Regards, > > Jon Page > > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: <https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20121010/2cf4b25a/attac hment.htm> > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > pianotech mailing list > pianotech at ptg.org > https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives > > > End of pianotech Digest, Vol 48, Issue 15 > *****************************************
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC