reducing hammer weight

[Mark Dierauf]

Good point and I might have, but most of the hammers in this set needed 
to have mass added to them, and my table saw setup isn't really as 
accurate as the sanding for removing smaller amounts of material. But if 
the whole set needed reducing by a gram then absolutely the saw will get 
you there faster better cheaper!

- Mark Dierauf

David Love wrote:
> In the case below I would order the set unbored so
> that you can use the table saw method of reducing the weight with a full end
> to end taper-especially if you are routinely having to remove that much from
> the set that high up.  
>
> 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 Mark Dierauf
> Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 5:11 AM
> To: Pianotech List
> Subject: Re: reducing hammer weight
>
> 1.5 grams from a 1/8" hole? What are the moldings made from? I mostly use
> Steinway hammers and a hole that size barely makes a difference. In the
> example pictured, the more aggressive coving netted me about .3g max, and I
> then had to taper the sides to get the additional .5g that I needed for this
> hammer. I do this freehand on a stationary belt sander. By using the part of
> the sander that curves around the end roller it is possible to hourglass the
> sides of the hammer without removing anything at the crown or making the
> tails so narrow that they chew up the backchecks. The reason I start with
> the coving is that if you try to get a full gram on the beltsander then this
> hourglassing begins to become visually prominent.
>
> - Mark Dierauf
>
>
> </div> 
>
>
>
>
>