Finding the strike line another method

[Avery Todd]

Thanks. That's what I was wondering.

Avery


On 7/25/07, David Love <davidlovepianos at comcast.net> wrote:
>
>  Just bend them.
>
>
>
> David Love
> davidlovepianos at comcast.net
> www.davidlovepianos.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Avery Todd
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 25, 2007 6:26 AM
> *To:* Pianotech List
> *Subject:* Re: Finding the strike line another method
>
>
>
> David,
>
>
>
> This would also entail moving the backchecks also, wouldn't it? Or can the
> wires
>
> just be bent to accomodate the strike line "curve".
>
>
>
> Avery
>
>
> On 7/25/07, *David Love* <davidlovepianos at comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
> Another example of modified strike line in a Steinway B c1983.  My method
> is
> somewhat like Dale's except when I have the entire piano in the
> shop.  When
> I suspect there is a problem I hang all the hammers in the tenor and the
> upper treble section at 130 mm leaving the lower capo section
> unhung.  Most
> problems in Steinway's are in that section though they can drift into the
> upper section as well.  It's always a good idea to test strike point
> accuracy on the old hammers before you remove them or destring the piano.
> Anyway, after finding the proper strike point for C88 I set the blocks or
> markings on the keybed and test the lowest note in the upper treble to see
> if it is correct.  If it is not (in this case it wasn't) I move the action
> in or out (out in this case) until I find how far it needs to move.  Then
> I
> work my way up the scale until I find the note which doesn't need to be
> moved.  In this case C7 was fine but F6 need to come in to 127 mm and the
> notes between C7 and F6 progressed uniformly.  I made a mark on the key
> indicating a 3 mm move was necessary on F6 and C7 was ok.  Next I hung
> samples at the end of the lower capo section (C5 and E6) and on G5 and C6
> so
> that the samples are fairly evenly spaced through the section.  I secure
> the
> hammers with only a tiny spot of glue on the top of the shank and don't
> spin
> the hammer as I slide it on.  That makes it very easy to remove but holds
> it
> in place so you can test for tone without the hammer rotating on you.  By
> moving the action in and out I found that the 127 mm hanging at F6 needed
> to
> be continued at E6 and move in to 126 mm at C6.  G5 needed to be moved in
> only to 128 mm.  C5 was perfectly happy at 130 mm.  I made marks on the
> keys
> to indicate the extent of the move for my samples.  I then removed the
> action from the piano and rehung my samples at the appropriate distance.
> Then I removed and rehung the hammers in the upper capo that needed to be
> moved to form a straight line between C7 and F6 after which I hung the
> rest
> of the hammers in the lower capo section.  I prefer this method when you
> have the piano in the shop rather than hang the entire section and then
> move
> all the hammers that need moving.  By sampling you can get a good
> indication
> of the extent of the curve modification without hanging, removing and then
> rehanging the entire section.  When you have only the action in the shop,
> it
> is probably better to hang the entire section and then figure on moving
> once
> you get back to the piano.  A simple flat tray, a straight edge, a heat
> gun,
> hammer removing pliers and reamer are all you really need to do the job
> quickly on site.  Hanging the hammers with Titebond trim glue to begin
> with
> will allow you to duplicate the glue collar without resorting to heating
> up
> a pot of hide glue (does anyone still use that stuff:-)).  It's a hassle,
> but worth the trouble when you hear a smoother tonal transition through
> the
> capo section.
>
> David Love
> davidlovepianos at comcast.net
> www.davidlovepianos.com
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20070725/21c59b88/attachment.html