The good news, Kevin, is that wonderful things await you in the realm of improved tuning levers. Like brother Porritt, I too have a Fujan (although mine is more recent, carbon fiber). Wow, what an improvement over what I was previously using! The quantum leap in stiffness means less strain on you and much more nuanced control of the tuning pin. As David says below, once you've tried one of these new innovations, you won't look back. For grands, I look forward to trying Dan Levitan's new design (much posted about this on the Bechstein B thread that launched this line of discussion), as soon as Marinelli gets it into production. Alan Eder -----Original Message----- From: Porritt, David <dporritt at mail.smu.edu> To: caut at ptg.org <caut at ptg.org> Sent: Wed, Oct 21, 2009 2:29 pm Subject: Re: [CAUT] Tuning hammer technique and latest tuning hammers (Kevin Fortenberry) Kevin: I bought a Fujan a couple of years ago and have never looked back. Mine is old enough that it's the aluminum tube so it's a little heavier than the new carbon ones, but it works very well for me. The stiffness. Once you've used a lever that stiff, nothing else feels right. dp David M. Porritt, RPT dporritt at smu.edu -----Original Message----- From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Fortenberry, Kevin Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 3:34 PM To: caut at ptg.org Subject: Re: [CAUT] Tuning hammer technique and latest tuning hammers (Kevin Fortenberry) List, I am really enjoying the discussion on hammer technique, and after reading and thinking about the last post from Fred, I was tuning a Hamilton in the bass and switched to my right hand (which I started doing about 10 years ago after running into tremendous wrist, elbow and shoulder pain) and noticed that I do hold my hammer at 2 to 3 o'clock on many occasions. I also have evolved over the years into a very similar technique to what you guys are describing. I will continue to observe and try to improve further. Thanks for this! By the way, after a few months of using both hands to tune, all my pain is gone (except for "tuner's neck" of course). My question is: I really need to invest in a new hammer, and I thought maybe some of you could share with the list what hammer/s you like the best and why. I am interested in the Jahn extendable from Pianotek; the Charles faulk hammers seem really nice; and then there are the new carbon fiber shank ones like Fuyan, etc. I know this could be a can of worms because everyone has to choose what works for them, but I would really like to know what some of you all have selected for use in a real world. I have been using one of 2 hammers, my old Apsco ext with a ball added on, and a Schaff rosewood ext.-also added a ball a few years ago. Thanks to all. Kevin Fortenberry ________________________________________________________________ Message: 1 Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 21:34:41 -0400 From: "Ed Sutton" <ed440 at mindspring.com> Yes, that is correct, and it seems to be important in making the hammer very rigid. es Subject: Re: [CAUT] Bechstein model B tuning stability If memory serves, no. Part of Dan's approach is to have all joints welded together for extra rigidity. Can someone else verify this? Alan Eder -----Original Message----- From: David Ilvedson <ilvey at sbcglobal.net> Subject: Re: [CAUT] Bechstein model B tuning stability I remember Dan's article and the photo of the hammer. Seems rather large...does it break down for transport? David Ilvedson, RPT Pacifica, CA 94044 Subject: Re: [CAUT] Bechstein model B tuning stability On Oct 18, 2009, at 11:07 AM, Ed Sutton wrote: >> Fred- >> >> The point of Dan Levitan's over-the-stretcher lever is not to >> "eliminate flagpoling." The point is to eliminate unintentional >> flagpoling. You are free to control flagpoling in all directions, >> with or witout rotational forces. >> >> In a standard tuning lever, whenever you apply rotational force, you >> are also applying a certain amount of tilting force, proportional to >> the "rise" of the handle from the pin in the block, in the direction >> you are pushing the handle to rotate the pin. >> >> In Dan's over-the-stretcher lever, there is no rise, so if you >> rotate, you only rotate. But you are also free to tilt the pin in >> any direction, intentionally, not accidentally. It's not at odds >> with your approach, it's a more controllable version of your approach. >> >> Ed > OK, fair enough. I "eliminate" the undesired tilt from the equation >by using a 12 o'clock position (11 to 1, to be precise), meaning the >tilt is at very close to 90 degrees from the string, and has minimal >effect on the string. That works well for me. Dan's design is >intriguing, but would require a major re-learning of technique. Which >is not necessarily a bad thing. Sometimes starting again from scratch >is a good way to leave bad habits behind. Dan's design also >essentially requires the hammer be in line with the string, for >geometrical reasons (though 6 o'clock instead of 12 for a grand). So >the technique would be the same - lean the pin towards or away from >the string for the given purpose. >Regards, >Fred Sturm >University of New Mexico >fssturm at unm.edu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/caut.php/attachments/20091018/6313d3a4/attachment-0001.htm> ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ CAUT mailing list CAUT at ptg.org http://ptg.org/mailman/listinfo/caut End of CAUT Digest, Vol 12, Issue 52 ************************************ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/caut.php/attachments/20091021/a09daa04/attachment.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC