Kimball LaPeanut (a bit long)

[Delwin D Fandrich]

Billbrpt@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 98-02-06 06:52:19 EST, you write:
>
> << .how would you describe the action in this piano?..it is *Grand*, but
>  it's not *conventional*..inquiring rookie minds want to know..>>
>
>    It's horizontal and very basic.  That's one thing to remember with it,
> basic.  You're wasting your time trying to get very fine adjestments of
> anything: let-off, drop, repetition spring, hammerline, even key level & dip.
> Of course,  there is a certain standard but generally with a more expensive
> instrument, you have to start with a rough regulation and refine it at least
> two or three times before you might be satisfied but not with this one.
>
>    But this is the very reason you can take this instrument with ease and
> confidence.  You'll be able to do a satisfactory job with the most basic of
> skills.  Novice technicians should look to Kimballs as an instrument they can
> gain valuable experience on with a low level of risk.
>
>    The design of the action you are talking about is unique to Kimball but it
> is analogous to any other grand action, just a little more crude and
> simplfied.  It does seem to reflect the attitude some have taken about it, "A
> Kimball is a Kimball is a Kimball."   (But tell them to call me if you don't
> want to work on it.  My bank account won't know it's not a Steinway).
>
>    Bill Bremmer RPT
>     Madison, Wisconsin

-------------------------------------

Well, now, wait just a minute here. Yes, the LaPeanut is pretty basic, but so are all of
the other peanut pianos. They can still serve a useful function in the great scheme of
things musical.

My first serious experience with one of these pianos came when I was called to make one
work again for a young women who was a piano major at a local college. (Local to Portland,
Oregon, that is, not Hoquiam, Washington.) It had been a gift to her from her parents and
she played on the thing for about four hours a day. Every day. Well, she did until the
action pretty much quit working. The dealer would have nothing more to do with her. The
said this was abnormal use! Can you imagine that? In any case, their "technician" had been
out to "service" it more than a couple of times but didn't have a clue. Each time the poor
thing just got worse.

Getting a new, and presumably more robust, piano was not a possibility. This piano had to
get her through college. She was just into the beginning of her second year. She'd had the
piano for about one year when I first saw it. And, yes. The action was pretty much
trashed.

So, what to do. I started by replacing all of the rubber and foam pieces that the various
regulating screws worked against with leather or hard felt. I replaced both the jack
regulating screws and the repetition lever regulating screws with repetition lever upstop
screws. (You know, the screw that is commonly, though incorrectly, referred to as the
hammer drop screw.) The type of screw that I used had a fairly broad and nearly flat
working end as opposed to the very small diameter -- basically the cut-off end -- of the
small screws that had been originally installed. (I think that before Kimball quit
building pianos they had pretty much switched over to this type of screw. By the way,
these actions were not built by Kimball. This was a Pratt-Read action first and then
Pratt-Win, i.e., Baldwin, when they took over. It was called their U-7 design.) I replaced
the soft jack regulating punchings with a hard woven felt. It was being called "artificial
leather" at the time. I've no idea if this material is still available -- I hope so, it
was good stuff. . I even replace the capstan felt, the original of which was also quite
soft. (Toward the middle of the scale there were a few capstans that had nearly warn
through to the wood body of the wippen.) I replaced the key bushings with real felt. I
replaced the hammers with something else. I don't remember what. They were a bit heavier
and softer. Probably Ronsen's. I finished up by surfacing the hammers a bit and needling
them down a bit. The owner lived in a one-room "efficiency" apartment. She didn't need
loud. Oh, yes. I also regulated the action once I had it all back together. Once the
action work was all finished, I weighed off the keys to 55 grams in the bass down to 52
grams in the treble. Things were much better, but the action still seemed a bit "light" to
her taste. She felt that there wasn't enough "resistance" for her fingers to work against.
So I also installed matching leads on either side of the balance pin to increase the
reciprocating mass a bit.

(I should say that, while this all sounds pretty involved, it didn't really take all that
much time to accomplish. The job sounds much more formidable than it was.)

While the finished piano still sounded pretty much like a Kimball LaPeanut -- I'd love to
put a new board in one of these things some day along with a decent stringing scale and
some really good hammers -- it played remarkably well. As well, the regulation was quite
stable. I put another set of hammers on it and re-regulated the action the summer after
she graduated from college. The piano had served her well and went on to help her achieve
her masters in piano performance. The last I heard (this was in 1979 or 1980, I think) it
was going back home -- wherever that was -- and was going to be the second piano in her
small teaching studio. It was going to be the piano she played. Her students were going to
play on the used M&H A (I think) that she was buying.

Regards,

Del