Bechstein B hammer rake / more thoughts

[Richard Brekne]

Hi.

Comments interspersed below

    This seems overcomplicated. Under normal conditions string height
    minus hammer flange center height = bore distance. Hammer shank
    horizontal at impact. I don’t care whether the string is at a
    nominal incline to the bridge.

Shank horizontal at impact has been what I've done for some 30 years 
now. Hammer perpendicular to this horizontal shank for the reason you 
mention below. The thread a couple months back prompted me to take a 
second look at this way of doing things.

    In other situations (like the Bechstein) where the formula above
    gives you a bore distance that compromises stretch clearance, strike
    point access, or a
    just a hammer that is of reasonable length (and weight) I throw out
    the shank horizontal at impact requirement and go with a reasonable
    bore distance to get stretcher clearance and strike point
    accessibility and then add some rake to get the hammer perpendicular
    to the string at impact. Again, ignoring any nominal incline of the
    string.

Yes, thats more or less what Jon stated in the exchange where you 
evidently had the same sort of head scratching about a similar piano 
Strikes me just that there should be a more straightforward way of going 
about finding an optimal bore/rake combination in such instances. And 
tho the Bechstein may be a bit extreme... It has gotten me wondering 
just how nominal a string incline or normal the situation really is in 
an average piano, and if there might be a more effective way of figuring 
both.

    In fact, ignoring the string incline is a good way to take into
    account some inevitable hammer wear. The hammer may start out
    slightly (almost immeasurably) undercentering, but within a hundred
    or so hours of playing it's probably right on.

Assuming your nominal normality thing yes...

    It works and worrying about cosines and various unnecessarily
    complicated formulas borders on mental masturbation. Of course, some
    people are into that.

    David Love

Sigh...yet another expression of disdain for the shape of another's 
learning curve in that classy fashion of yours eh ? Some might simply 
call it being constructively inquisitive. But you are right ... some 
people clearly are ... "into that".

RicB