Actually the action was pretty light and I even removed some lead from the bass section a couple of years ago. It's still not heavy though I did have the option of reinstalling a few leads if it were necessary. dp David M. Porritt dporritt at smu.edu -----Original Message----- From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Keith Roberts Sent: Saturday, July 01, 2006 11:11 AM To: College and University Technicians Subject: Re: [CAUT] Steinway hammer spec. What about downweight? You would have to have a lighter hammer to have the same downweight or did that come back to normal too? Keith Roberts ----- Original Message ----- From: "Porritt, David" <dporritt at mail.smu.edu> To: "College and University Technicians" <caut at ptg.org> Sent: Saturday, July 01, 2006 7:20 AM Subject: Re: [CAUT] Steinway hammer spec. > I just wanted to respond back about my experiment in moving the hammers > to a more nearly normal position. In this D the hammers toward the bass > were hung much closer to 5" than 5.125" and I wanted to move them out. > I did, it worked, no problems with back-checks, sostenuto etc. The > Ronsen Wurzens sound great though I've had to use an artist's brush > worth of acetone/keytop on the bass and last sections, and a little in > the tenor. They just needed a little more punch in that hall. I'm just > glad I didn't run into geometry problems! > > dave > > David M. Porritt > dporritt at smu.edu > > -----Original Message----- > From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of > A440A at aol.com > Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 4:22 PM > To: caut at ptg.org > Subject: Re: [CAUT] Steinway hammer spec. > > Dave writes: > << the tails of the bass hammers are pretty > close to the wippen (OK repetition!) and I'd like to move them out to be > the same as the treble hammers. Can anyone see a problem waiting to > happen here? >> > > Greetings, > As the hammer moves farther out on the shank, you will need to > space > them more to the treble, since the rake of the bass strings goes that > way. > Otherwise, I can't see any problem. (of course, I have been smacked by > things I > didn't see for a long, long time.). You might want to double check that > you > don't have backcheck clearance problems if you do increase the length. > Then that > gets into sostenuto rod clearance, which gets into tab lengths on the > underlever post, which might be dependent on dampertray geometry. Hell, > before you > know it, you might need to move the bridges, in which case it might be > easier > to simply put in a new pinblock and soundboard so you can get it exactly > > right.... > I have never found any tonal difference in moving hammers 1/8" in the > bass > section on a D, but that ain't to say it didn't happen while I wasn't > looking. > Regards, > > Ed Foote RPT > http://www.uk-piano.org/edfoote/index.html > www.uk-piano.org/edfoote/well_tempered_piano.html > > > >
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC