Ric, When Steinway New York builds their grands with the string-plane well above spec. and does nothing to accommodate that with the action this can be a very real problem. This is a problem that is plaguing technicians in some very big school systems. A D at one of the schools I service was over-striking by about 3/16" when brand new. Some hammer shaping later and it is probably closer to 1/4". If the springs were a little weaker I'd be dealing with occasional catastrophic failure. As it is, the shanks are well above the cushions. On another note the Steinway dealership has refused to look at the piano so far and it is still under the short warranty. Their dealer tech broke a bunch of the drop screws trying to back them out further then they could so they were not unaware that a problem existed. People in the UC system are encouraging the school to seek legal remedies as the camel's nose for UC to get their same Steinway problem addressed. We may yet see a civil suit filed with the UC system offering amicus curiae briefs. Wait till that story hits the front page of Music Trades! I obtained felt to bolster the whip cushions when the action starts capsizing but I've kept the springs strong and the key-pins polished. The drop screws won't back out far enough to let the hammers rest anywhere close to the strings at drop so I don't have to worry about bubbling. I hesitate to patch on more felt because this is a warranty issue Steinway should fix and I don't want to be in the middle "mucking it up." When I called New York about it they sent action shims but no warranty service authorization. I told the school they could pay me to do it or put the screws on Steinway. They said Steinway WILL take the piano back and rebuild or replace it. I've had to do it on another piano with the red felt wrapped over. Kind of ugly but that piano needs everything done to it and they asked me for the cheapest, quickest fix and they got it and like it fine. Sometimes reality just doesn't cut any slack for you, Andrew Anderson At 07:04 AM 6/17/2007, you wrote: >Hi all > >I have to admit this still seems a bit strange. Not that I doubt >anyone mind you... but one thing nearly all replies have alluded to >is a situation where the shank is resting on the cushion.... and at >the same time resulting in a condition where the jack can not get >under the knuckle if it was not already under there to begin with. > >This speaks to me of two problems. First... the jack is supposed to >be under the knuckle well before the the shank even gets close to >the rest position after play. If it doesnt.. then either the rep >lever spring is too weak, or the center may be to tight.. or the >jack is regulated too far out... similar things. The rep lever is >supposed to lift the hammer via the knuckle up to a position where >the jack can slip under as soon as (nearly immediatly after) the key >is released. Second... if resting on the cushion to begin with... >then either the rep lever spring is to weak (again)... or the >whippen is simply regulated too low. A low whippen wouldnt cause >this problem... quite the opposite really... it would solve it by >introducing an artificial sort of lost motion. > >All this said... I've run into actions where something like this >seems to happen to individual keys. Not to the point of action >failure.. but to the point where getting a stable hammer (rest) line >is virtually impossible. I've always solved the problem with >friction control measures... replacing worn parts... and securing a >good enough regulation with appropriate spring strength. > >If the cushion height forces the hammer to rest too high... this >should basically just result in an uncomfortably shallow dip. If >its too low... a dip which would be too deep.... yes ? no ? Id >like to hear from Bob Hohf on this one... seems like his action >heights article perspective would be valuable here. > >Cheers >RicB > > > >Ric writes: > >I have not thought of this has being related to relative positions >of the balancier and hammershank centers tho. And I am still a bit >foggy on how these can contribute to this condition. > > > hmm, I may have stepped on a semantics snake, here. I didn't > mean to say >that the relative positions of these two *contribute* to the problem, but >rather, illustrate the condition, ie, when the Knuckle is so low >that the action >cannot reset. One major cause, I believe, is that in the capsized state, the >hammershank is resting on the cushion so its weight isn't helping the key >return. this leaves only the spring to overcome the FW and return >the key to its >at rest position, which it is not designed to do. > > >On the surface of it... it would seem that as long as you regulate >with in reasonable correspondence to specs... all should >work reasonably well. > > >I agree, however, the normal in a Steinway is that the specs are all >over the place, (generally owing to excessively high or low plate >height). This >is why the brand allows the creative regulator to excell. These actions >respond to regulating according to principles rather that pre-set >figures. I have >increased the height of the rest cushions to overcome the capsizing problem. >It is not only much easier than raising the cleats, it doens't upset the >hammerflange pin to string relationship, (though there is often much >to be improved >in this regard if the pinblock is not too thick.) > >Regards, > >Over recent years, Steinway has begun to increase their allowable keydip to >accomodate longer knuckle geometry, but that is another discussion. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/caut.php/attachments/20070617/96ffb46b/attachment.html
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC