[pianotech] Hammer strike line. Was-----Yamaha Hammer Suggestion

[David Love]

Well the question was whether the change in the counterbearing area might explain the difference in strike line sensitivity.  I was just saying that I've done new RC&S board without changing the counterbearing area as well as with changing it.  In addition, I've rebuilt pianos keeping the original cc boards but changing the counterbearing area and the pattern persists.  The cc boards need the strike line modification and the RC&S boards don't.  The counterbearing area doesn't seem to matter for this particular issue, at least not on the pianos I've done.    

David Love
www.davidlovepianos.com


-----Original Message-----
From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Ron Nossaman
Sent: Sunday, February 07, 2010 8:29 PM
To: pianotech at ptg.org
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Hammer strike line. Was-----Yamaha Hammer Suggestion

David Love wrote:
> I can’t speak for Ron but sometimes I do and sometimes I don’t.  
>  It depends on the angle leaving the capo bar.  For example, on those 
> old B’s with the removable counterbearing plates (the ones that use 
> individual round understring felts) I often don’t change them because 
> the steepness of the angle leaving the capo bar is adequate for the 
> length.  On other pianos where the angle is less acute I do and then 
> move the bar forward or make it taller depending on how the shelf 
> accommodates the new counterbearing bars.  Also, I’ve changed the 
> counterbearing area on pianos where I’ve kept the original boards and 
> they still required the strike line modification.  So I’d say 
> that’s not it, the counterbearing area doesn’t seem to account for 
> the difference.

And how does this relate to the strike line?
Ron N