This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment Kind of sounds like resiliency (sp?) is just as much a factor as = hardness. Perhaps a shank can be too hard.? Interesting discussion. Thanks Brian Trout -----Original Message----- From: Delwin D Fandrich <pianobuilders@olynet.com> To: pianotech@ptg.org <pianotech@ptg.org> Date: Monday, June 07, 1999 12:37 AM Subject: Re: Hornbeam =20 =20 Yes, I've read all that as well. Just one more example of the = numbers alone not telling the whole story. Some years back I compared = maple hammershanks to hornbeam shanks directly, although the tests were = not exhaustive. On average, the maple shanks had less bend to them. I = did not find that the hornbeam shanks "transmitted energy" any better = than did maple shanks -- if as well. The repetition lever stop screw = (sometimes incorrectly called the "hammer drop" screw) became loose in = the flange much more quickly in the hornbeam than in the maple. = Hornbeam forks (where the centerpin goes through) was also more = susceptible to impact damage. The maple shanks were simply "tougher."=20 There was a greater variation among the maple shanks, however. In = fact, I suspected that some of the maple shanks I tested were actually = made of soft maple, not hard maple as specified. The manufacturer of = the maple shanks was not generally noted for its careful quality control = procedures.=20 Del=20 -------------------------------=20 ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/6c/96/a8/12/attachment.htm ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC