Mark, check out http://www.spurlocktools.com/id35.htm That's what you do when you can't match varying hammer weights with varying shank weights to get a good average. I think Stanwood reaches deeper into the action. After all wood in the whippens can can be different dimensions and weight too. I think he uses springs. Then there's overweighted keys and misplaced capstans etc. Andrew Anderson At 06:58 PM 11/14/2005, you wrote: >Ric Brekne writes: > > >The shank Strike weights showed a high of 2.06 grams and a > >low of 1.40 That works out to about 3.5 grams of static > >down weight at the key. The hammers themselves had a few > >big jumps here and there and started off at a mid medium > >curve with a nice bulge up to top medium in the mid treble > >and again in the mid high treble. All in all I could > >have ended up with a real interesting set of combined s > >trike weights had I not spent the time matching shank > >sw's to hammer dead weights. > >So how'd you match them? Big with small, big with big, or >just trying to smooth out the bumps? Perhaps you could post >the hammer and shank sw that you ended up with for each note? > >-Mark >_______________________________________________ >pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC