Counter bearing treatment

[Richard Moody]

Thanks Newton for the reply. 
	
In your reply you mentioned ....

> Whatever the string height the hammers need to be
> bored to equal the height of the strings from the keybed and minus the
> height of the hammer centerpin.  Most else is irrelevant with certain
> exceptions.

This was a topic that came up on those "endless" phone conversations. 
Ideally, the bore of the hammer was equal to the "blow" or the striking
distance.  Another criteria was that the hammer shank be parallel to the
string when striking. (execptions to this lead to a lot of Q&A)  This
would mean then the center pin of the shank was same distance from the
string as the "bore".  So in a piano with a 1 7/8 bore, the center pin (of
the hammer flange) would be 1 7/8 from the string.? (+  1/16 for let off?)
 If this is set in stone,  the rest of the apparatus would have to
conform.  And this is what you said.  
	One thing I never got to ask was "what about the diff between SnS at 1
3/4 and all the rest at 1 7/8  but both with 3/8 dip? It seems the piano
of the "immortals" sits 1/4 inch closer to the string.  How is that
significant to the dip to travel ratio? does that mean the "5 to 1 ratio"
is somehow magically different?   Or did they patent the 1 3/4" blow? 

I wrote...
> > If the pins must be higher than the strings then you have problems of
necessarey plate structure to accomodate this.

You wrote..
> Chickerings could give you a major debate on this issue.  Go look at a
> couple.

I own a Chickering "Anniversery Grand"  I have seen some more pronounced
"ski slopes". The pins are higher than the strings.  Of course this is
only one.  btw this has half agraffes under the capo bar, where the heck
am I going to find replacements for them when I restring??---ric