There definitely would be regulation to do on raising the stack. Let
off and drop would be set for the original distance to the strings.
Capstans would be low by the amount the action was raised. Checking
might still work but could need massaging because of the change in
angle of incidence. I hadn't thought about the sostenuto but Barbara
is right, it will need to be adjusted downwards because the
underlevers are off of the keys and the Steinway sostenuto is on the
action which is being raised. It seems to me that just raising the
back would change the strike point which could get significant enough
to hear in the high treble. Something to try out and see if it is an
advantage or disadvantage.
Changing the thickness of the hammer cushion is one thing that has
been discussed and I've done it for a Steinway action with CAF. This
is in an old D in a highschool where there is no budget currently to
do what needs to be done.
In this case there are other problems to fix as well and I want to
choose a solution that addresses all of them adequately. So far
shimming seems to be the best solution that doesn't involve new
hammers with tail extensions and rebalancing the keys.
Andrew Anderson
On Feb 26, 2010, at 5:50 PM, David Ilvedson wrote:
> List and Stan
>
> I'm trying to get my head around this...so I'm writing it out to
> help me understand. Please explain what I'm missing....
>
> If you raise the back side of the stack you have effectively moved
> the hammers closer to the strings. Hammers would be on the rest
> cushions until you reg the lost motion, but the hammer is still
> closer to the strings than before. Letoff is now too close and
> hammers blocking. When letoff is adjusted your drop should be
> closer to letoff?...Andrew said something like 1/4" drop. It would
> be nice to be able to turn the drop screws down a bit so they are
> not at their limit. The rep lever cushion isn't by any chance to
> thick?
>
> We have a Stein D that has loose shims under the back of the stack
> and I'm trying to see what I can do. This was an attempt to
> correct a new Steinway, so they do come out with these problems
> sometime...
>
> David Ilvedson, RPT
> Pacifica, CA 94044
>
> ----- Original message ----------------------------------------
> From: "Stan Kroeker" <smkroeker at shaw.ca>
> To: caut at ptg.org
> Received: 2/26/2010 2:29:23 PM
> Subject: Re: [CAUT] Shimming the Steinway Action stack to reach the
> strings
>
>
>> I'm not sure I understand how raising the stack (with shims) will
>> change the optimum hammer blow distance. We're assuming the action
>> is
>> otherwise regulated to spec? ie: 10mm keydip, 2 mm letoff, 0.040"
>> aftertouch (sorry to mix units)? Won't you simply be raising the
>> capstans to meet the higher whippen heel and all else remains, more
>> or
>> less, the same?
>
>> Someone mentioned the word 'ratio'. Might this be measured to
>> determine if, perhaps, the capstans ought to be repositioned as part
>> of this realignment?
>
>> Best regards from the cheery Canadian prairie,
>
>> Stan Kroeker, RPT
>
>> On 26-Feb-10, at 2:26 PM, Chris Solliday wrote:
>
>>> And Jim is probably right in this case, as over 2 inches blow
>>> distance is alot. Not to mention that you say the drop screws are
>>> fully backed out. You may need different dimensioned parts. I guess
>>> the point is that we in cyberspace need alot more information from
>>> you before we can get specific.
>>> Chris Solliday
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: James N. Hess
>>> To: caut at ptg.org
>>> Cc: caut at ptg.org
>>> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 3:10 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [CAUT] Shimming the Steinway Action stack to reach the
>>> strings
>>>
>>> Often you are very limited on the amount you can raise the stack
>>> because of interference with the pinblock. My experience has been
>>> that you may be able to add 1/16". I think reboring the hammers is a
>>> better solution.
>>>
>>> Jim Hess, RPT
>>>
>>> On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:58:36 -0500 "Chris Solliday"
>>> <csolliday at rcn.com> writes:
>>> String Height minus Hammer Bore equals Shank Center Pin Height. We
>>> use laminated shim stock that we get from the local hobby store.
>>> Realize that just raising the pin height MIGHT work, but consider
>>> the arc of the hammer blow. You could end up with the hammer over
>>> centering if you simply raise the feet under the hammer flange pins.
>>> You need to imagine the pin in space and rotate the stack around it
>>> so that the stike point ends up at ninety degrees to the string. It
>>> might not be that now. Usually this means shimming the front foot
>>> slightly as well. Best of luck Andrew.
>>> Chris Solliday, RPT
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Andrew Anderson
>>> To: caut at ptg.org
>>> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 12:45 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [CAUT] Shimming the Steinway Action stack to reach the
>>> strings
>>>
>>> Yes, mea culpa. Wasn't really thinking the numbers...most likely
>>> 2"+
>>>
>>> On Feb 26, 2010, at 11:30 AM, reggaepass at aol.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> The school whose Steinways I service is not satisfied with the
>>>> dealer's warranty fix (greater then 1" blow distance).
>>>> Andrew,
>>>>
>>>> Not sure what you mean by this ("greater then 1" blow distance").
>>>> Did you mean greater than 2" (since it sounds like the strings are
>>>> too high)?
>>>>
>>>> Alan Eder
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Andrew Anderson <andrew at andersonmusic.com>
>>>> To: College and University Technicians <caut at ptg.org>
>>>> Sent: Fri, Feb 26, 2010 9:13 am
>>>> Subject: [CAUT] Shimming the Steinway Action stack to reach the
>>>> strings
>>>>
>>>> The school whose Steinways I service is not satisfied with the
>>>> dealer's warranty fix (greater then 1" blow distance). They are
>>>> requesting that the piano be made to play like it should which will
>>>> require shimming the stack so it is within reach of the strings
>>>> (>1/4" between fully backed out drop-screws and pinblock).
>>>>
>>>> Has anyone done this? What was the scope of work required? What is
>>>> a reasonable amount of time to complete the work?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Andrew Anderson
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> James Hess, RPT
>>> 200 W. Allen St.
>>> Mechanicsburg, PA 17055
>>> 717/580-1445 (cell)
>>> www.hesspiano.com
>>>
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> Love Spell
>>> Click here to light up your life with a love spell!
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC