[CAUT] S&S M Strike point

[Dale Erwin]

Bob
 I agree
Dale


So, in that that sense, changing the bore distance does not have the same effect, but it does have some effect.   
Bob Hull


Dale Erwin R.P.T.
Erwin's Piano Restoration Inc.
 Mason & Hamlin/Steinway/U.S. pianos
www.Erwinspiano.com
Phone: 209-577-8397

 
  








Greg,
Isn't action efficiency effected by bore distance and tone quality is supported by an efficient action.  Is that what you were clarifying?  If a hammer/shank does not travel to a point where it's transfer of energy to the string is most efficient, then tone will not be optimal.  However, this would not be the same type of tonal differentiation as moving the hammer line (strike point) in or out.  
So, in that that sense, changing the bore distance does not have the same effect, but it does have some effect.   
Bob Hull




  
 
 
  
  From: Greg Newell <gnewell at ameritech.net>
 To: caut at ptg.org 
 Sent: Monday, December 24, 2012 10:43 PM
 Subject: Re: [CAUT] S&S M Strike point
  
 


John, Dale, et al,
            How would bore distance change tone where hanging distance on the shank did so previously? Dale’s line of hanging the hammers (not straight in the treble) directly affects the tone and or power of each note in that region. I fail to understand how changing bore distance would do the same thing. Dale, should your first sentence below read string height and not plate height?
  
Greg
  

From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Dale Erwin
Sent: Monday, December 24, 2012 10:44 PM
To: caut at ptg.org
Subject: Re: [CAUT] S&S M Strike point

  
Hi John 

  Good to hear from you.

 I read your post and that wouldn't explain it as I custom bore all my hammer sets to plate heights minus center pin heights in each section. I'm quite fussy about it as N.Y Steinways are notorious for plate height un-even-ness thru out the string plane. My guess is that most of the German cousins has a better made plate.

 Also even if my hammers were overstriking they would be going in the right direction for improved tone.  I pull the strike line towards the front of the piano not the back. I have done this countless times always with a superior result to a straight strike line. see attached picture

  

 J.D wrote--On the last two of these pianos I did, a Hamburg B and a Hamburg D, if I had used “standard bore” hammers I would simply have replicated the errors Steinway originally made and failed to rid them of the resulting weakness.  In the case of the B, the string height was 8mm. higher at one point in the middle of the scale than it was at the top.  I had to order hammers 5mm longer than the standard length and I then bored the hammers differentially to account for the arch in the strike line.  See the picture below.

  

 Totally understood here John.

Best

Dale

Dale Erwin R.P.T.
Erwin's Piano Restoration Inc.
Mason & Hamlin/Steinway/U.S. pianos
www.Erwinspiano.com
Phone: 209-577-8397

 
  

  

-----Original Message-----
From: John Delacour <JD at Pianomaker.co.uk>
To: caut <caut at ptg.org>
Sent: Mon, Dec 24, 2012 2:39 pm
Subject: Re: [CAUT] S&S M Strike point


On 23 Dec 2012, at 20:52, Dale Erwin <erwinspiano at aol.com> wrote:



...Also,...FWIW  I've posted many times before hanging the hammers in a straight line in any Steinway model (prior to the plate changes in the 1990s) will result in less than optimal sustain and power and... reduces clarity and tone color with the shift engaged.

  

Hello Dale, 

  

I have indeed seen you mention this before and seen pictures of the result, and it’s always occurred to me that the reason you have found this kludge necessary is that you did not custom bore the hammers for the piano but used standard bore hammers, with the result that where the strike line is grossly arched in the middle of the scale owing to Steinway’s lack of quality control, your hammers are over-striking—that is to say striking the string a few millimetres too near the termination.  This was the case with some (probably many) grands when they left the factory in the 1970s and 80s; they were never right because they were fitted with standard bore hammers.

  

On the last two of these pianos I did, a Hamburg B and a Hamburg D, if I had used “standard bore” hammers I would simply have replicated the errors Steinway originally made and failed to rid them of the resulting weakness.  In the case of the B, the string height was 8mm. higher at one point in the middle of the scale than it was at the top.  I had to order hammers 5mm longer than the standard length and I then bored the hammers differentially to account for the arch in the strike line.  See the picture below.

  

To my mind this is the only way to do the job properly.  The result is that the hammers are all glued on at 90°, the shanks are all the standard length (say 130mm) and the hammers all strike the string at 90° (or slightly before if allowance is made for future wear).  Any other device, such as canting the heads outwards or increasing the shank length I regard as a kludge, and Steinways themselves, it seems, didn’t even bother with kludges but just let the salesmen manage their faulty goods.

  

A happy Christmas and New Year to all.

  

JD

  

  

  

  



  






 
 
  
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/caut.php/attachments/20121225/ce6cb54a/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 425855 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/caut.php/attachments/20121225/ce6cb54a/attachment-0001.png>