[CAUT] bechstein

David Ilvedson ilvey at sbcglobal.net
Mon Aug 7 11:07:43 MDT 2006


Gee, Joe...you want more that what's below?...;-]   I think you responded to the wrong post...but I think the screw went under the back side of the key slip...but that seems a little obvious...probably something to do with the metal bar...could it have been missing a screw?

David Ilvedson, RPT
Pacifica, CA  94044


----- Original message ----------------------------------------
From: "Joe And Penny Goss" <imatunr at srvinet.com>
To: "College and University Technicians" <caut at ptg.org>
Received: 8/7/2006 9:56:19 AM
Subject: Re: [CAUT] bechstein


>Close answer but be slightly more precise.
>Joe Goss RPT
>Mother Goose Tools
>imatunr at srvinet.com
>www.mothergoosetools.com
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Alan McCoy" <amccoy at mail.ewu.edu>
>To: <caut at ptg.org>
>Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 10:45 AM
>Subject: Re: [CAUT] bechstein


>> David,
>>
>> Be sure early on to take care of the obvious friction
>> problems/inconsistencies that you have.
>>
>> Also note #40 presents some issues (a BW of 48!). I'd bet that the leading
>> pattern changes on this note. Smoothing the FW will help out these
>> inconsistencies.
>>
>> Alan
>>
>>
>> -- Alan McCoy, RPT
>> Eastern Washington University
>> amccoy at mail.ewu.edu
>> 509-359-4627
>>
>>
>> > From: David Ilvedson <ilvey at sbcglobal.net>
>> > Reply-To: <ilvey at sbcglobal.net>, "College and University Technicians
>> > <caut at ptg.org>" <caut at ptg.org>
>> > Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2006 22:28:10 -0700
>> > To: <caut at ptg.org>
>> > Subject: Re: [CAUT] bechstein
>> >
>> > The action regulates well...I was wondering about the action
>spread...113 mm,
>> > but that seems OK?   The slotted wippen rail has a washer impression
>quite a
>> > bit closer towards the balance rail...
>> > The capstans seem to be in line with the balance rail.   I will be
>installing
>> > new shanks and flanges, probably Renner but I'm considering Abel, so the
>> > knuckle alignment should be good...
>> > I haven't looked closely at the magic line with a thread, but just eying
>it,
>> > it seems OK...
>> > I"m leaning towards the Abel Standard...the Abel Select really seemed to
>> > heavy...stock sample #29 was 10.5 grams...no shank...1/2 high.   I
>wonder if
>> > that 10.5 could be brought down 2 grams?   I'm thinking adding a pit of
>weight
>> > to the Standards makes more sense than removing from Select.   Any
>comments on
>> > the difference between these hammers?   Both seem to be a beautiful
>consistent
>> > hammer...
>> >
>> > John Delacourts comments about Abel making Bechstein hammers makes me
>think
>> > they might be a good match for this piano...I did try the a few in the
>piano
>> > and like the sound...
>> >
>> > David Ilvedson, RPT
>> > Pacifica, CA  94044
>> >
>> >
>> > ----- Original message ----------------------------------------
>> > From: "David Love" <davidlovepianos at comcast.net>
>> > To: "Pianotech List" <pianotech at ptg.org>, "College and University
>Technicians"
>> > <caut at ptg.org>
>> > Received: 8/6/2006 9:34:56 PM
>> > Subject: Re: [CAUT] bechstein
>> >
>> >
>> >> With the exception of note 16 (not sure what's going on there), I don't
>see
>> >> any real problem here.  Even if you were you to reweigh down to 37 or
>38
>> >> grams, you are comfortably under FW maximums (as outlined by Stanwood
>> >> charts).  You do have some room to add weight especially if you wanted
>to
>> >> push up the balance weight a little.  An R of 5.6 or 5.7 is a
>reasonable
>> >> target, in my view, for good regulation specs--check and see though.
>If you
>> >> smooth out the strike weights in the basic range that your hammers seem
>to
>> >> be falling and set up the front weights accordingly aiming for a
>uniform
>> >> balance weight, you should be fine.  I would double check the
>measurements
>> >> on #16.  My guess is that there is some measurement error.  Trying to
>get
>> >> perfectly uniform R numbers is generally not possible depending on
>things
>> >> like uniform knuckle hanging, straight capstan line and capstan line
>> >> parallel to the balance rail line (which it appears you may not have),
>not
>> >> to mention elimination of measurement error (always a factor).
>> >
>> >> If the current hammers produce a tone that you like with the current
>weight,
>> >> why would you change hammers?  If you want to experiment with weight,
>you
>> >> can always use the binder clip method--removeable too!
>> >
>> >> David Love
>> >> davidlovepianos at comcast.net
>> >> www.davidlovepianos.com
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>


More information about the caut mailing list

This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC