[pianotech] re design

PAULREVENKOJONES at aol.com PAULREVENKOJONES at aol.com
Tue Feb 3 18:52:23 PST 2009


John:
 
For the sake of clarification of terminology, are you using bore angle in  
the high treble to mean what we call rake? And don't most Bechsteins have a  
designed rake in the last octave?
 
Paul
 
 
In a message dated 2/3/2009 8:08:37 P.M. Central Standard Time,  
deanmay at pianorebuilders.com writes:

John

Your posts are typically wonderful and provide the rest of  us with graduate
level continuing education in piano technology. Thank  you.

When you say a "treble with studs" are you talking about agraffes  in the
treble? 

Dean

Dean May         cell 812.239.3359 

PianoRebuilders.com    812.235.5272 

Terre Haute IN  47802


-----Original  Message-----
From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org  [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf
Of John Delacour
Sent:  Tuesday, February 03, 2009 4:32 PM
To: pianotech at ptg.org
Subject: Re:  [pianotech] re design

At 19:15 -0800 2/2/09, Gene Nelson  wrote:

><<The typical hammer for note 88 with agraffe is small  compared with 
>the normal in my experience. I do not necessarily want a  larger than 
>normal hammer - but at least normal - probably an Isaac  hammer or 
>equiv. I believe that the typical  agraffe hammers at the top 
>note/s are small because of  strike point issues? Hammer hitting 
>agraffe/plate so they get reduced  in size? No, I do not like 
>thuddy/knocking sound up there.

A  treble with studs can sound wonderfully strong and clear if the 
proper  measures are taken and if very careful measurements are taken 
before  boring and gluing on the hammer heads.  I am working on two 
such  pianos at the moment, a 1924 Bechstein C and an 1865 Kirkman 
Style  2.  Neither piano had any useful sound in the high treble when 
I took  them in.  Both the Bechstein had and the Kirkman hammers were  
original.  I ordered VFG hammers for the Bechstein and hammers with a  
special Wurzen felt for the Kirkman.  In both cases the top hammers,  
from Abel, were considerably fatter than the originals, but I'm used  
to that.  They can be slightly sanded down as needs be.

Though  the Bechstein is well made generally, the metal frame under 
the agraffes  was very rough.  The hammers in the whole top section 
and a few below  had been fouling the frame and must have done so 
almost from the  beginning.

There is one big difference between this Bechstein and this  Kirkman. 
The high strings on the Bechstein are, most unusually, almost  
horizontal, and the strike height is almost uniform throughout the  
scale, whereas on the Kirkman they slope up to the bridge at more 
than  5 degrees, reducing to about 2 degrees at the first break.  The  
latter configuration is far more common and requires a lot more  
thought, as I will explain.

There is _one_ optimum strike point for  the hammer in the extreme 
treble and that is roughly 1/16 of the speaking  length, say 3mm for 
note 88. If the string is struck by the hammer head at  a perfect 
right angle at this point, you will get the best sound for that  
hammer head.  If you plan to remove felt from the top of the hammer,  
this must be taken account of _before_ the hammers are bored.  Better  
than removing felt to increase hardness is to inject a little dope  
round the tip of the moulding.  That said, I have needed to use no  
dope on either the Kirkman or the Bechstein and the extreme treble on  
both is excellent.  I hardly ever use dope.

Now, neither the  Kirkman nor the Bechstein ever sounded or behaved as 
well as they do now,  and the reason is that the original finishers 
did not take account of the  individual characteristics of the 
instruments as regards strike height and  string angle.

There is a good reason for the gradually increasing  upward slope of 
the strings in the top section of grands that use studs,  and that is 
that it allows more clearance between the near side of the  
hammer-head and the metal frame, since the hammer, in order to strike  
the string at a right angle must be cast forward at the same angle as  
the strings' upward slope.  Thus a wider hammer-head can be brought  
to strike the string at the proper point than if the strings were  
horizontal. I don't think Bechstein ever quite worked this out; on 
the  older grands the top hammers are exceptionally thin and spindly 
in order  to clear both the belly and the metal frame, and by the time 
they made  this 1924 piano they were still sending out pianos that 
after a little  playing would have problems with treble tone.

The boring length should  follow the differences in strike height, so 
that if the  strike  height is, say, 200mm at note 40 (strings 
horizontal) and the design  requires the head to be at 90 degrees to 
the shank (not by any means the  rule), then for a hammer centre 
height of 150mm, the bore length is 50mm  if you make no allowance for 
wear.  If the strike height is 196 at  note 85/88, then the bore 
length must be 47...

...But then there is  the important question of the _angle_ of the 
head to the shank, which must  be altered following the slope of the 
strings.  If in the above  example I went ahead and bored all the 
hammers at 90 degrees, my top  hammers would understrike considerably 
and not only would I need to thin  the hammer-head to stop it fouling 
the frame but also I might still not  hit the proper strike point, 
even at the wrong angle, and tone would  suffer.

Back to the Kirkman, where the original hammers were bored  roughly 
respecting the strike heights, but all at the same angle, from the  
point where the strings began to slope upwards to the bridge, I  
gradually change the bore angle and, when gluing on, gradually  
increase the length from the hammer centre to the centre line of the  
hammer moulding.  The result is that, for a string slope of 5 degrees  
and a bore length of 50mm, the hammer head is glued on 4.36mm further  
out than the head of note 40.

This is just a worked example, which  supposes that the strike line is 
exactly parallel to the hammer  rail.

I am sure that if restorers, and even makers, were to learn these  
things and put them into practice, we'd hear a lot less about dope 
and  hammer  weights.

JD






















>That  said, I have experimented with larger - or should I say  
>heavier hammers in the high treble with very good results. They  just 
>need to be a bit harder. I have an idea that more  hammer mass up 
>there will allow the strike point to be lengthened  slightly but I 
>cannot prove it just  yet.






**************Great Deals on Dell Laptops. Starting at $499. 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1217883258x1201191827/aol?redir=http://ad.doubleclick.
net/clk;211531132;33070124;e)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech_ptg.org/attachments/20090203/2992b5d4/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the pianotech mailing list

This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC