Hi Richard. Thoughts interspersed below: Terry Farrell ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Brekne" <Richard.Brekne@grieg.uib.no> To: <pianotech@ptg.org> Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2001 2:49 PM Subject: Re: Fw: Upright Hammer Weight > Farrell wrote: > > > Oops. That's right Richard, Stanwoods numbers are Strike Weight. I was simply > > > > weighing hammers. Now how am I going to measure Strike Weight on the > > upright? Or rather, I guess I can see how to set it up on the little stand > > and measure the Strike Weight, but the real question would be how does this > > compare with the grand numbers because now you have the weight of the hammer > > butt incorporated into the hammer strike weight number. This is all becoming > > clear as I write this. These upright SW measurement made with the butt > > attached should indeed be directly comparable with the grand SW measurement. > > Yes? No? I do believe this would be true. I'll go out into the shop and > > measure some SWs with the old setup and the new and see where they fall. > > I'll report back. Maybe I need to even look over Stanwood's stuff, but I do > > not recall his material describing how it relates to an upright. > > > > Terry Farrell > > > > > > Well, lacking any wise words from the certified Stanwood boys here, I'd say that > measuring SW's for uprights would be pretty much the same procedure. Weigh the > key from the center pin similiar to the grand shank Yes, agree. >... but I am not sure it > would be necessary as the "weight" of the shank in uprights is going to be much > less a factor because of the fact that its roughly vertical... I would think > just weighing the hammers themselves would be enough, When speaking of touchweight, I would agree. However, regarding the mass of weight (momentum) behind a hammer when striking a string to produce a desired spectrum of tones/volumes, I should think it virtually the same as with the grand. With the grand, you find a desired hammer mass, i.e. Strike Weight - that will give your piano the sound you want, and then manipulate the rest of the action to work with this hammer (or rather SW curve). I should think this to be the same with the upright regarding sound production. Yes, I agree that differing SWs on the upright will have less an effect when measuring DW and UP with a set of weights, and also less an effect on how the touchweight feels. But the key here is how much hammer do I need to produce optimal sound for this piano??? > and I suspect that it > might not really be worth your time... maybe on a really nice upright... who > knows ? I see your point, but keep in mind, all I am trying to do here is simply arrive at a generally optimal size hammer for the piano. A pretty basic need I should think. >In anycase this has nothing to do with Stanwoods touchweight design for > grands... thats an entirely different puppy. His material doesnt deal with > uprights. Correct. > Still, if its a good upright, it might be neat to hear if the effort of putting > the hammers on a nice SW curve results in an easier voicing job, or how > differing curve zones affects the general sound of the piano. I think you are on the right track by mentioning voicing and general sound. Any idealization of hammer weight on the upright I presume will have a much greater effect on piano sound/voicing (similar as it would on a grand) than it might have on touchweight - although a bit I suppose - at least from the inertia standpoint. > I say... go for it if you got the time !! ;:) What got me going here is that my new untrimmed hammer weights are 25% to 50% more mass than the old hammers. That seems like a lot! So sure, I suppose I need to trim/taper them - but do I? How much? etc., etc. I read about tapering the new hammers to get rid of some weight, but how do we know where the ideal lies? I think what I will do is set up some sample notes and try the paper clip thing like on a grand to increase SW and observe the piano tone. Without cutting up my new hammers before I know what I am targeting, I suppose it would be OK to put a #60 hammer in the #40 note position to evaluate what effect a lighter hammer would have, etc. I'll see what happens! > > > > -- > Richard Brekne > RPT, N.P.T.F. > Bergen, Norway > mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no > > >
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC