<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; = charset=iso-8859-1"> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2180" name=GENERATOR> <STYLE></STYLE> </HEAD> <BODY bgColor=#ffffff> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Step back in time.......</FONT></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; = BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><BR><B><?color><?param = 0000,0000,0000>From: <?/color></B>Horace Greeley <<A = href="mailto:hgreeley@stanford.edu">hgreeley@stanford.edu</A>><BR><B= ><?color><?param 0000,0000,0000>Date: <?/color></B>August 31, 2004 10:20:40 PM CDT<BR><B><?color><?param = 0000,0000,0000>To: <?/color></B>Pianotech <<A = href="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org">pianotech@ptg.org</A>><BR><B><?color= ><?param 0000,0000,0000>Subject: <?/color>Re: Big hammers<BR></B><BR><BR><BR>Barb - I would be more = concerned about overall action geometry that the size of the hammers at this point.  Those knuckles look a bit close to the flange = pin. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>They are close.  At first I = thought I measured 16 mm, but then I got out my caliper (after my trip to the store to buy = a new battery for it, of course)--they're 15.5 mm.  I was told this rebuilding is about 10 years old.  The piano is from = 1975.</FONT></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; = BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV> Also, looking at the backchecks, this is a pre-'87 = instrument (for _me_, this is a GOOD THING!...largely because of the significantly = larger range of regulation possible...long subject and I am not looking to = start a discussion)...being of that vintage, you are also going to want to = check not only action spread, but also deck height from the keybed to the CP of = each of the whippen and hammer flanges.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>OK, I can do that, but does it make any difference that these are = 10 year old (or so) Renner parts that aren't working so well at the = moment?  Action spread is 4.50".  I just have the stack home with me now.  Is = there a "best way" to measure from the keybed to the CP of the whippen and = hammer flanges?</DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; = BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Try to carefully assess what was actually done at the factory, = and what has been done since then...looking especially to see if there has been = a change in the material under the back rail cloth.  Usually, this = would have had a layer of red key felt, often on top of one or (sometimes, = but not often) two layers of what amounts to manila card stock (this latter = usually dark brown in color).  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The back rail felt is = original.</FONT></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; = BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Also, check to see when/if anyone has replaced the balance rail = pivots; and/or the front rail (felt) punchings.  etc.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I believe that balance rail pivots are = original, but could you describe what the originals looked like?  I doubt the = front rail punchings are original.</FONT><BR><BR>> In other words, before = doing _anything_ try to get a very solid idea of what it is you are looking = at.  Then, work </DIV> <DIV>> backwards.  As someone (Andre?  Isaac? sorry) noted, = sometimes (even often) "just" a good, solid regulation will </DIV> <DIV>> do more for tone and projection than even many technicians = will believe.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Currently, on note 1 the Down = weight was 64 and Up weight, 33.  Using the Standwood measurements the balance = weight is way too high (48.5) and so is the Strike Balance ratio = (6.36).  (I don't plan on using spring assisted whippens--the jury is still = out on those with me--I've gotten too many mixed reviews).  When I put on = a New York Style 17 mm shank and did a quick regulation the DW dropped to 56 = and UW to 28 (still using the Renner whip--which measures out to match the drawing = of the Hamburg style whip in the Steinway manual--from 1992) and the other = numbers (Balance weight and Strike balance ratio) got a lot closer to what I've = read is acceptable (and it certainly felt a lot better!).   I'll test = a few more notes on Friday to make sure that regulation is really = possible and to make sure my initial results weren't just wishful = thinking.  Are there any problems combining Renner whips with Steinway style = shanks?  Purists or distributors need not reply.  Just trying to keep this a = low-budget fix-up--but I'll do what is necessary, of = course.</FONT><BR><BR>> So, after all that, those look like S&S hammers; and, from what = little can be seen of them, they look as if they are </DIV> <DIV>> fairly well molded and shaped...so, look elsewhere before = simply throwing them out and starting elsewhere.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The hammers are going to work.  = When I first heard them, they sounded just about as nasty and glassy as you = could imagine, but now they have that nice broad, gutsy tone--producing a nice variety of tone color as they progress from soft to hard = blows.  The strike weights run from 12.5 - 6.5.  A friend tells me that's a = little heavy, but I'm inclined to leave them they way they are--for now, anyway.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>I'm = looking forward to what everyone has to say.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Barbara Richmond</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>PS  </FONT>At 12:23 PM = 8/31/04, Ric wrote:<BR><BR>> Jimminees Chrasmus.... look at those knuckle cores... = that HAD to be done willfully... .. </DIV> <DIV>> or maybe its just the picture is a bit distorted...<BR>> = RicB</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The picture is inaccurate.  The = knuckle is crooked but not bent.  Does that make sense?</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT><BR><BR><BR></DIV></BODY></HTML>