Avery Todd wrote: > Richard, > > One of these days, I'll get all this straight in my mind!!!!!! :-) > > >Depends a bit on the hammers themselves for me, but usually I end up > >with the lightest shanks for the bass... lightest of these at key > >number 1. Then the heaviest of shanks starts at the lowest tenor note. > > > >I weigh hammers as well ahead of time so if there is any of these that > >for whatever reasons are lots heavier or lighter then its neighbors I > >can match that with an appropriate shank to sort of even out a bit. > > So you're referring now to the type of overall weight I mentioned in > my original post? Not SW? Ah... I see I should be more carefull to be specific. I weigh the Shank SW for each shank and match that as per my last post with the hammers dead weight. Together they give the total SW for the whole hammer / shank assembly. The only thing that will change after you glue them is that little piece of the shank sticking out of the hammer end you cut off. Othewise weighing these two seperatly this way gives you your initial SW. > > In other words, basically if my lightest s/f weight was 6.8g, you'd > put that one on note #1 and graduate it on up, getting heavier, to the > break? Except we use the Shanks Strike weight....otherwise that is my basic pattern. Lightest shank SW at the bass hammer # 1, Heaviest starting at the low tenor. Now mind you... this is only what I most often end up with. If the bass hammers are lighter then I usually see them, and tenor / treble a bit heavier... then I might have to rearrange my matching to compensate. The idea is to more or less even out your initial SW as much as you can by matching each hammers dead weight to a Shank SW. Stanwoods web site has all this in pictures and descriptions. I think its also in the user pamphlet in the kit. http//:www.Stanwoodpiano.com > > > Then at that point, if my heaviest s/f was 8.2g, you'd put that one at > the first tenor note and graduate that on up, getting lighter, until the > thinned shanks start and begin those with the lightest, getting heavier > on up to #88? Again... same idea... but use hammer dead weight with Shank SW. > I understand about the S/W and maybe doing some matching with hammer > weight and can do that but it seems, as I "think" you are saying here, > that the overall s/f weight should also enter into the general placement > of the shanks before the hammers are glued on. I dont use shank flange weight at all. I understand that some do, but it doesnt fit into the Stanwood scheme anywhere as far as I know. > > Am I correct or am I just still trying to see through muddy water? :-) Just about there. There are several protocols for doing an action. Stanwoods is probably the most clearly defined. Just seperate your P's and Q's and you will soon be there. > > Avery > Cheers -- Richard Brekne RPT, N.P.T.F. UiB, Bergen, Norway mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no http://home.broadpark.no/~rbrekne/ricmain.html
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC