This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment I would be lying if I said I didn't already have my own opinion. But I = am interested to hear what people say because it is one of those very = subtle problems compounded by the difficulty of knowing what we are = feeling and communicating it. This is also one of those problems where the solution pushes the = envelope of what is advisable. I believe that she is responding to the = low friction in the flanges. However that is not something I want to = duplicate for various reasons. I also think that the higher balance = weight is acceptable only because of the low friction: i.e. it is more = the downweight that appeals to her (along with the accompanying high = upweight perhaps).=20 The solution I plan to employ is to use a shank/flange assembly that has = relatively low friction to begin with. That means Abel instead of = Renner. These flanges, I find, tend to be lower in friction and react = less to humidity changes. I will sort them carefully. I will use a = hammer that is relatively low weight (similar to what is on there) so as = not to increase friction by virtue of higher strike weight. Lubricate = everything else as much as possible to see if I can't exchange some = increased friction in the flange with lower friction somewhere else. I = will lower the balance weight to the degree that there is an increase in = friction so that the downweight remains somewhat the same. My usual = default on balance weight is 38 grams. But I will always choose a BW = depending on the friction in the system. A system with lower friction = will need a higher balance weight and vice versa. Too much friction, = though, can lower the upweight too much if you compensate by lowering = the BW. If I can get the friction to 10 - 11 grams in the middle, that = would allow me a BW of 39 - 40 grams on this particular instrument. =20 In a situation like this, I think there is no perfect solution. To = duplicate what is there exactly would be a mistake because of other = problems that accompany having no friction in the flange. The best = solution will have to be a compromise and an attempt to most closely = match what is there without sacrificing the performance of the parts. = In this case, I think it will require a lowering of the balance weight = to compensate for the effects of a slight increase in friction. =20 At least that's what I think today. David Love ----- Original Message -----=20 From: "Richard Brekne" <Richard.Brekne@grieg.uib.no> To: "Pianotech" <pianotech@ptg.org> Sent: December 31, 2002 2:37 AM Subject: Re: What weight shall it be? Hey there David. Nice to have a Touchweight question up again. > David Love wrote: >=20 > So here's a question for all you action geo-philes out there. I'm > replacing a set of hammers and shanks. The shank pinning is virtually > frictionless at present. The balance weight is 42 g, but the > downweight is only 50 grams in the center (i.e. 8 grams of friction). Thats pretty low friction allright. Tho 50 grams DW is usual enough. > When I replace the shanks the friction will go up by probably 3-4 > grams in the center. The pianist says she likes the current weight > and doesn't want to change it. Is she responding to the balance > weight or the downweight? =20 Just a thought David.... what makes you think (not that I am saying you DO ... grin) that she is not refering to the lack of shank friction ? > Will she be happier with a 42 balance > weight and 53 - 54 grams of downweight where it was once 50, or will > she be happier with a reduced balance weight that yields a similar > downweight with the increase in friction? >=20 My advice would be to avoid overdoing the change in hammer shank friction and try and compensate any difference with action lubrication otherwise.. ie key bushings, etc. I've seen this before. Do your best at everything, tighten up those flanges so the hammers deliver that nice solid blow on hard play, go out of your way to keep DW the same and the customer "feels" a gigantic change somehow.=20 > Something else to think about. >=20 > David Love >=20 --=20 Richard Brekne RPT, N.P.T.F. UiB, Bergen, Norway mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no http://home.broadpark.no/~rbrekne/ricmain.html _______________________________________________ pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/03/6b/e5/c1/attachment.htm ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC