Here's my approach (similar to Chris's, I think...maybe?). After boring and shaping I weigh the hammers. Then I weigh the shanks (as levers). Let's say the median shank weight is 1.7gr, and they range from 1.4 to 2 grams. I make a spread sheet that adds the hammer weights to 1.7gr. (column A) >From this I calculate the ideal strikeweight continuity. (column B) Then I subtract column A from column B, which gives a list of corrections needed. Now, by substituting the odd weighted shanks for the 1.7gr shanks, I can make a lot of +/- 0.1,0.2,0.3 gram corrections. With a bit of luck I can hang the top 20 hammers and make almost no weight changes to the hammer heads. Ed Sutton ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Solliday" <csolliday at rcn.com> To: "College and University Technicians" <caut at ptg.org> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 9:12 AM Subject: Re: [CAUT] hammer line > Jim, > no i make a smooth taper (left ot right heavy to light) of both the sorted > shanks and the strikeweight calibration. The shank sorting by weight taper > is preliminary to the strike weight calibration. As Eric has said you look > at the capo bar and wonder what are we missing in terms of evenness. Once > you get up past not 50 or 60 the largest variable factor is the shank > weight. We (Stanwood folks) used to correct that too by removing or adding > material or lead. I weighed the hammers before installation once and > compared them to the differential for the strike weight calibration and > noticed that the hammer weight, after normal preparation, was very even > but > that I still had alot of variable "calibration" to do. And some of those > hour glass shaped hammers do cause people to ponder and wonder. So it > occurred to me that the shanks must be variable and so I weighed the next > set, had an AHA moment, and have been sorting them ever since. Kudos to > the > hammer manufacturers, Abel, Ronsen, Renner, steinway (yes even), for their > production of more evenly tapered hammer weights than in the past, > although > the more I think about the retro calibrations I've done the more I think > the > shank weight could be the largest factor there too. > You could also experiment with altering the curve and maybe solve some > more > issues. Bob Marinelli has always said this is possilbe and As I recall Dan > Harteau has had good success with that. > That said, If the capo line is bent I think the hammerline should reflect > it. And soundboard response is for me a hidden factor that I just feel I > correct for by the above described process. I try two or three even > sometimes four sample spots for strike point to get enough feedback on > that. > hope that helps, > Chris Solliday > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jim Busby" <jim_busby at byu.edu> > To: "College and University Technicians" <caut at ptg.org> > Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 7:42 PM > Subject: Re: [CAUT] hammer line > > >> Hi Chris, >> >> Could you elaborate on "calibrating the strikeweight"? What I mean is, I > understand the sorting of shanks, but what does that do to the SW curve? > Do > you alter the curve? (Put kind of a dip in it?) >> >> Thanks. >> >> Jim Busby >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of > Chris Solliday >> Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 11:23 PM >> To: College and University Technicians >> Subject: Re: [CAUT] hammer line >> >> Jim and Alan, >> You guys have probably thought of this but I thought I'd mention it > anyway >> because I haven't seen it as part of this thread. >> Calibrating the strikeweight from at least note 52 up before assessing >> the >> hammerline makes what you hear make more sense. I glue my line on >> straight >> with a calibrated strike weight, after sorting shanks by weight, and then > I >> seem to have less need to vary the strikeline. >> I don't have any hard data from the way I used to do it before. I think > the >> real difference comes from the sorting of the shanks as they can vary a >> whole gram or more. Calibrating strike weight without sorting the shanks >> really makes alot of unnecessary work and can make for some funny looking >> hammers in the treble section. >> At least this is something to consider. My treble voicing issues have > become >> considerably reduced by doing it this way. I think that before I used >> this >> procedure I was more inclined to funkify my line than currently, not that > I >> don't. Maybe I just feel like I get a better result overall. And maybe > it's >> actually less funkification. I wish I could prove it but I wasn't looking >> for that particular improvement so I didn't do a good before and after. >> Anyway there's 2 more cents. >> Chris Solliday >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Jim Busby" <jim_busby at byu.edu> >> To: "College and University Technicians" <caut at ptg.org> >> Sent: Monday, February 11, 2008 3:46 PM >> Subject: Re: [CAUT] hammer line >> >> >> > Alan, >> > >> > This looks like what Dale Erwin does to all Bs. Did you attend that > class? >> I've always been a bit afraid of making this kind of funkyfied > hammer-line. >> You're only the second person I've known crazy enough to actually do it! >> I >> guess I'll try it now. >> > >> > Regards, Jim >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of > Alan >> McCoy >> > Sent: Monday, February 11, 2008 1:17 PM >> > To: College and University Technicians <caut at ptg.org> >> > Subject: [CAUT] FW: hammer line >> > >> > Hello folks, >> > >> > Thought I'd share this photo. I ruined a perfectly straight hammer line > on >> a >> > 1898 S&S A. It was the most dramatic hammer line problem I have >> encountered. >> > I moved the top hammer of the first capo region about 3/16" toward the >> capo, >> > and the lowest hammer of the top capo region about 1/8" toward the >> > capo. >> For >> > both areas I thought I'd taper the hammer line all the way to the other >> end. >> > But as it turned out I only needed to start the taper (according to my >> ear) >> > at the half-way point (G5 up to the break, and D7 down to the break). >> > >> > This area had always sounded funky and I was trying to find out why. I >> > couldn't believe how much improvement this made. >> > >> > I know that these hammers and shanks were put on about 10 or 12 years > ago, >> > but I don't know if the originals were hung straight or not. I wonder > when >> > S&S figured out they needed to grind the capo out toward the bridge. > There >> > was plenty of room on the capo to just grind it, rather than have to >> recast >> > the whole capo bar. >> > >> > Alan >> > >> > >> > -- Alan McCoy, RPT >> > Eastern Washington University >> > amccoy at mail.ewu.edu >> > 509-359-4627 >> > >> >
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC