[pianotech] Re-pinning

[Dean May]

I'm with you on this, Ed. But when you have techs saying the customer should
settle for nothing less than a new piano it becomes too emotional an issue. 
 

Dean

Dean W May                (812) 235-5272

PianoRebuilders.com    (888) DEAN-MAY

Terre Haute IN 47802

 

  _____  

From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf
Of Ed Foote
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 2:22 PM
To: pianotech at ptg.org
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Re-pinning


 Paul writes: 

>>Avery and Mario, my first thought was that Schimmel should replace the
piano... I'll revisit that possibility with Schimmel. Short of that, no, I
don't feel that I am going to do factory quality work. I've gotten "pretty
good" on replacing single strings but my beckets point all over the place. I
don't want to practice uniform pin height and uniform becket direction
(times 200+) on a nearly new piano.  <<

      I would make the case for CA.  Schimmel may not dig the departure from
precedent, but I have never seen CA fail to restore torque, and now, after
6-7 years, we have evidence that the improvement is permanent.   Beyond
that, if CA didn't help, you can still restring with one size over and have
a very decent tuning piano.  I have had to do that on a job where the CA was
ok for torque, until the string broke, (I think it must have suffered
serious over cranking by techs that were suddenly surprised to pull their
hammer back on a pin with 20 lbs of torque).  Rather than putting the
additional rotation on the pin to install a new string, I just went up one
size and it was fine, (about 110 lbs, if I remember).  If I was a district
service rep, I would be glad to give this a shot vs. taking a piano back in.

Regards, 
Ed Foote RPT 
   

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech.php/attachments/20101030/58ccc7e1/attachment.htm>