David Stanwood: >>Last weekend I completed a 1902 Mason & Hamlin CC (9' 4 1/2")action with new >>Renner parts. ......... Dennis Johnson: >Can you or someone else explain to me why the Renner M&H replacement shanks >are of the "European" style, with full leverage and big knuckles? Ask Lloyd at Renner USA >Your key ratio modifications to this 1902 M&H imply that it originally had low >leverage shanks as well. Or lighter hammers. Or it had a heavy feeling action. I don't know what it was origionally but I sure like it now. The Renner USA parts are a close match, dimensionally, with the originals, however I've consistently had problems being able to turn the letoff high enough without the buttons coming up against the letoff rail. My previous M&H job using Renner USA parts required moving the letoff rail up about 3/16". I would rather have not had to do this! (that was a 7' screwstringer). I had the same problem with this latest M&H but not so extreme. I squeaked by with going to a slightly thinner button and cloth. If the knuckle is smaller diameter wouldn't that make this problem worse? David C. Stanwood P.S.- Peter Mohr told me that there were only 12 of these 9' 4 1/2" CC instruments made. Has anyone out there seen any of the other 12? This is a gorgeous piano! I've also heard very negative opinions about early CC models but I don't know if the comments were directed to this particular size and scale.
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC