Steinway M problem

[Richard Moody]

I guess I don't understand why the action has to be force fitted, I
mean fore-fitted to the key frame, because the capstain line position
will vary from piano to piano due to finding the optimimum striking
point.    The only thing that could be off is the plate and only in
the V bar area.  Do the plates really vary that much? What are the
tolerences any way? I guess only the factory knows the variance of
the capstain line from piano to piano.   It seems to me that the
whippen cusion could  set on the capstain within 2mm  either way.
Thats almost 3/16".  That's more than enough to fire a framing
carpenter. Where does the variation in pianos come from?? Besides I
thought the key frame could be slid in and out for optimum striking
point at least a half inch (13mm).  I also thought the distance from
the center rail pin to the center of the capstain was super critical.
 So I assumed the capstains were set on the keys in that regard, on
the bench according to a template.  So much for assuming, I presume.
Oh, and I swear I heard a couple of old timers talking about
switching actions in a B. And I thought my teacher tried it on his M
and it worked.  But that was a long time ago, (before the piano we
are talking about was built perhaps) and you know what they say about
time and memory..  And  I just heard on the news that four glasses of
wine a day will put off Alzheimers.  I think I will go have another.
Hmm is it my second or third?
	I have always wished for line up pins every time I put a an action
back on the key frame.Sure would make those screw holes easier to
find, and harder to strip.   If this position is so critical from
piano to piano, I would think line up pins would be soup d'jour.
(The kind that are added after everything is screwed into place.)

Richard Moody
----------
> From: Horace Greeley <hgreeley@leland.Stanford.EDU>
> To: pianotech@byu.edu
> Subject: Re: Steinway M problem
> Date: Monday, March 24, 1997 10:39 AM
>
>
> Richard,
>
> I am sorry, but I do not understand your post.
>
> With (older) hand-built pianos, all of this forefinishing stuff was

> accomplished in reference to to:
>
> 	- String height, measured from the keybed to
> 		the under-side of the vbar, usually at several points; and,
>
> 	- Strike point, determined by (among other things):
> 		1.- What I would characterize as the "raw" tone of an
> 			unshaped, unvoiced new hammer; and,
> 		2.- What I would characterize as "experience influenced
> 		 	geometry.
>
> That is to say, the action was not fit to the keybed until the
(relatively)
> stationary parts were in place (and tied down).  Since this was the
case,
> "line up pins" were (are) not only superfluous, but
contraindicated, as they
> tend to give impression of their being only one "correct" location.
>
> So, while in the case of some pianos, finding one that is "right"
may be of
> some value.  In the case of an M, however, the numbers (and,
therefore,
> relative "rightness") of one piano may be disasterous on another.
>
> Someone else has probably already spoken to this.
>
> Best.
>
> Horace
>
>
> At 09:51 PM 3/21/97 -0600, This question was asked...
> >How come the capstans miss their whippen cushions??
> >
> >Of course the action was set right on the key frame.  In other
words
> >the action standard screw downs were right on the money.  Perhaps
> >there should be "line up pins" as my automobile mechanic calls
them.
> >For such a precise placement, I have often wondered how they get
the
> >action placed exactly right,especially with hard to get at hold
down
> >screws.
> >Some used cleats, so some red face if that is the case in an M, as
I
> >havn't seen one in a while.
> >	Which is often the answer to perplexing problems, check out an
> >instrument that is "right" to see if there are differences.  Then
you
> >know if the
> >line up pins, or screw holes, or cleats, or anyting else differs.
> >(such as the angle of the capstans)
> >
> >Richard Moody
> >