[CAUT] Cross papering

[Geoffrey Pollard]

Hello David,

Could you explain "cross papering" of flanges?

Thanks,
Geoff Pollard
Sydney Conservatorium of Music


-----Original Message-----
From: caut-bounces at ptg.org on behalf of Porritt, David
Sent: Wed 1/3/2007 7:19 AM
To: College and University Technicians
Subject: Re: [CAUT] Parts
 
Alan:

I'm pretty much a Renner guy.  What part of "design" are you referring
to?  If you mean the non-flat rail it's not my favorite part of S&S.  If
the world were a perfect place I'm sure that design would hold the parts
securely. Since we have to radically change the design by using
traveling paper, and/or cross paper flanges to get the hammer aimed in
the right direction the design becomes an impediment rather than a help.

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
Alan McCoy
Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 1:26 PM
To: College and University Technicians <caut at ptg.org>
Subject: [CAUT] Parts

Hi Folks and Happy New Year to all,

When you buy your next action parts - shanks, flanges, backchecks and
wippens - which manufacturer are you going to choose? And why?

Abel?
Tokiwa?
Renner?
Steinway?

I am currently working on a S&S M replacing S&F only and using Abel
parts.
Not finished with the job yet, but so far I like the parts.

Pinning consistent at around 3g.
Shank radius weight mostly at 5g, with a dozen at 4g and another dozen
at
6g.
Knuckle line is good. (Though I had to do a lot of flange papering to
compensate for the S&S rail design. I can't see much advantage to this
design. What am I missing?)

Thanks for your thoughts and experience.

Alan


-- Alan McCoy, RPT
Eastern Washington University
amccoy at mail.ewu.edu
509-359-4627






-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/caut.php/attachments/20070105/4b0b416a/attachment.html