[CAUT] Shimming the Steinway Action Stack

[Ron Nossaman]

Andrew Anderson wrote:
> So I gather that most of you consider this a time to re-hammer with 
> longer hammers.  I was hoping that shimming the stack would allow use of 
> normal hammers (stock or alternatives).

Shimming the stack should get you back in the range of 
"normal" hammer bore distance, shouldn't it? I thought that 
was the point.


> Regarding the capstan wippen cushion interface crossing the line at 
> almost full dip in the bass (as opposed to about half dip in the treble) 
> would you consider relocating the bass end of the stack (higher /?) to 
> help remedy that?

With the rampant absence of "magic line" compliance out there 
in action land, I think I'd favor bore length in this case, as 
a more survivable approach. In an instance where you are 
working with what you have, it's split and balance, average 
and fudge, and decimal places can stand back for whatever 
semblance of function can be had with getting the flange 
center in reasonable height proximity with string height. 
What's left over is character. Optimal was ruled out when 
Bonzo originally set the plate height wrong.


> I suppose Ds also benefit from selecting the hammer line in the treble too?

Yes, most likely, ascertainable by prospecting (trying it).


> Anything else?

Just the usual "see what you can do to make it into a piano 
with what's left" stuff.
Ron N