bechstein

[David Ilvedson]

Oops...

		FW
16		42.7
17		33.1
40		16.3
41		19.1
64		7.2
65		8.2

I notice the form I made doesn't transfer as nicely as I'd like...;-[

David Ilvedson, RPT
Pacifica, CA  94044


----- Original message ----------------------------------------
From: "Ric Brekne" <ricbrek at broadpark.no>
To: pianotech at ptg.org
Received: 8/6/2006 5:08:25 PM
Subject: bechstein


>Lists,

>I hope I can run some numbers by you for input...

>Bechstein E, #158555, 1966, Renner action...hammers not original but 
>appear to be Renner   17 mm KC


>Hi David.

>We are missing the FW's in this data set. How did you establish your 
>ratio without them... or did you just leave them out here ?

>Looks like your hammers are about mid medium weights... probably you 
>could go up a couple notches, especially if your ratio is indeed around 5.7
>Post the FW's

>Cheers
>RicB

>N         U        D        BW        SW        KR        WW        
>KC        R
>16       24        56        40        10.7        .53        
>19.5        17mm    6.8
>17       20        56        38        10.7        .52        
>20.4        17mm    5.6
>40       42        55        48.5       9.4        .52        
>20.4        17mm    5.7
>41       36        54        40          9.7        .51        
>19.9        17mm    5.8
>64       36        54        45          7.2        .51        
>19.9        17mm    5.8
>65       37        53        45          7.1        .51        
>19.8        17mm    6.1

>Bob M. at Pianotek thinks I need heavier hammers on this 9ft piano.   
>The piano is generally in a studio and rolled out to a stage/gym a few 
>times a year.   I don't think I need a heavier hammer...
>I mocked an Abel Standard hammer on key #33 with a stock weight of 9.1 
>grams gave me, with a 3/8" lead=11.5 grams on the key, a downweight of 
>about 50 and a 25 gram upweight.  The hammer was stock so it needs all 
>the typical trimming which will lower it's weight and lower the 
>downweight and upweight...a lower up weight is not good...

>I have so many questions...is it so important to lower my R?  On the 
>sample the only really bad R was on #16 and #65...which raised my 
>overall R...

>I haven't tried the shim to lower my R yet...

>I really appreciate any input...

>David Ilvedson, RPT
>Pacifica, CA 94044