Pianotech

As I was reshaping a set of hammers today I was, as always, being very careful to maintain the original strike point. But it occurred to me that when reshaping hammers that original strike point is no longer valid. When the size of a hammer is reduced the hammer has to move further causing it to over strike. The new reshaped hammer now has a strike point that is slightly behind the original strike point. So, today's question: when reshaping hammers should a new strike point be considered or should one try to maintain the original strike point?

------------------------------
Geoff Sykes, RPT
Los Angeles CA
------------------------------

Geoff

Technically, you're right, but a lot depends on how much you're taking off the top. If you're just removing a little, there is no worry. But if you've got deep grooves, over 1/16", then you will reshape the hammers to over strike. It's up to you how you want to handle this, but on hammers that are that deeply grooved, I recommend new ones.

------------------------------
Willem "Wim" Blees, RPT
Mililani, HI 96789
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 06-17-2020 02:18
From: Geoff Sykes
Subject: Hammer reshaping vs hammer strike point question

As I was reshaping a set of hammers today I was, as always, being very careful to maintain the original strike point. But it occurred to me that when reshaping hammers that original strike point is no longer valid. When the size of a hammer is reduced the hammer has to move further causing it to over strike. The new reshaped hammer now has a strike point that is slightly behind the original strike point. So, today's question: when reshaping hammers should a new strike point be considered or should one try to maintain the original strike point?

------------------------------
Geoff Sykes, RPT
Los Angeles CA
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 6/17/2020 3:23:00 AM
From: Willem Blees
Subject: RE: Hammer reshaping vs hammer strike point question

Geoff

Technically, you're right, but a lot depends on how much you're taking off the top. If you're just removing a little, there is no worry. But if you've got deep grooves, over 1/16", then you will reshape the hammers to over strike. It's up to you how you want to handle this, but on hammers that are that deeply grooved, I recommend new ones.

------------------------------
Willem "Wim" Blees, RPT
Mililani, HI 96789
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 06-17-2020 02:18
From: Geoff Sykes
Subject: Hammer reshaping vs hammer strike point question

As I was reshaping a set of hammers today I was, as always, being very careful to maintain the original strike point. But it occurred to me that when reshaping hammers that original strike point is no longer valid. When the size of a hammer is reduced the hammer has to move further causing it to over strike. The new reshaped hammer now has a strike point that is slightly behind the original strike point. So, today's question: when reshaping hammers should a new strike point be considered or should one try to maintain the original strike point?

------------------------------
Geoff Sykes, RPT
Los Angeles CA
------------------------------

Thanks, Wim. That works for me.

Roger - Interesting. I thought that overstrike meant that the hammer has moved beyond its normal arc, moving the strike point beyond, or over the top of the normal strike point. Understrike, therefore, meaning that the hammer isn't moving far enough within its normal arc making the hammer strike early, or under the top of the normal strike point. 

Alan - HAH! Yes, I understand. Never thought about making that adjustment again once it was initially correct.

------------------------------
Geoff Sykes, RPT
Los Angeles CA
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 06-17-2020 10:48
From: Roger Gable
Subject: Hammer reshaping vs hammer strike point question

All,

A technical pettiness. I thought we as technicians called "overstrike", that which occurs when the hammers strikes too far toward the bridge, and understrike is when the hammer strikes too close to the capo bar.

Roger

Original Message:
Sent: 6/17/2020 3:23:00 AM
From: Willem Blees
Subject: RE: Hammer reshaping vs hammer strike point question

Geoff

Technically, you're right, but a lot depends on how much you're taking off the top. If you're just removing a little, there is no worry. But if you've got deep grooves, over 1/16", then you will reshape the hammers to over strike. It's up to you how you want to handle this, but on hammers that are that deeply grooved, I recommend new ones.

------------------------------
Willem "Wim" Blees, RPT
Mililani, HI 96789

Original Message:
Sent: 06-17-2020 02:18
From: Geoff Sykes
Subject: Hammer reshaping vs hammer strike point question

As I was reshaping a set of hammers today I was, as always, being very careful to maintain the original strike point. But it occurred to me that when reshaping hammers that original strike point is no longer valid. When the size of a hammer is reduced the hammer has to move further causing it to over strike. The new reshaped hammer now has a strike point that is slightly behind the original strike point. So, today's question: when reshaping hammers should a new strike point be considered or should one try to maintain the original strike point?

------------------------------
Geoff Sykes, RPT
Los Angeles CA
------------------------------

Geoff,

You are, of course, correct about how the strike point effectively migrates when removing felt from the hammer crown while resurfacing. Precise strike point is fmost critical in the high treble and less so farther down the scale. That is one of the reasons there is usually a way to adjust the strike point at the treble cheek block.

Alan

------------------------------
Alan Eder, RPT
Herb Alpert School of Music
California Institute of the Arts
Valencia, CA
661.904.6483
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 06-17-2020 02:18
From: Geoff Sykes
Subject: Hammer reshaping vs hammer strike point question

As I was reshaping a set of hammers today I was, as always, being very careful to maintain the original strike point. But it occurred to me that when reshaping hammers that original strike point is no longer valid. When the size of a hammer is reduced the hammer has to move further causing it to over strike. The new reshaped hammer now has a strike point that is slightly behind the original strike point. So, today's question: when reshaping hammers should a new strike point be considered or should one try to maintain the original strike point?

------------------------------
Geoff Sykes, RPT
Los Angeles CA
------------------------------

Over-striking is when the hammer contacts the string at less than a 90 degree angle; impacting on the backside of the strike point.
Under-striking is when the hammer contacts the string at more than a 90 ° angle, impacting on the front side of the strike point.

For hammers that require enough material to be removed that it causes over-striking (due to the shortening of the bore distance),
elevating the top action to correct the geometry is possible. It will also raise the Let Off.  hopefully the capstans can be raised without losing purchase.

------------------------------
Regards,

Jon Page
mailto:jonpage@comcast.net
http://www.pianocapecod.com
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 06-17-2020 08:11
From: Alan Eder
Subject: Hammer reshaping vs hammer strike point question

Geoff,

You are, of course, correct about how the strike point effectively migrates when removing felt from the hammer crown while resurfacing. Precise strike point is fmost critical in the high treble and less so farther down the scale. That is one of the reasons there is usually a way to adjust the strike point at the treble cheek block.

Alan

------------------------------
Alan Eder, RPT
Herb Alpert School of Music
California Institute of the Arts
Valencia, CA
661.904.6483

Original Message:
Sent: 06-17-2020 02:18
From: Geoff Sykes
Subject: Hammer reshaping vs hammer strike point question

As I was reshaping a set of hammers today I was, as always, being very careful to maintain the original strike point. But it occurred to me that when reshaping hammers that original strike point is no longer valid. When the size of a hammer is reduced the hammer has to move further causing it to over strike. The new reshaped hammer now has a strike point that is slightly behind the original strike point. So, today's question: when reshaping hammers should a new strike point be considered or should one try to maintain the original strike point?

------------------------------
Geoff Sykes, RPT
Los Angeles CA
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 6/17/2020 11:02:00 AM
From: Jon Page
Subject: RE: Hammer reshaping vs hammer strike point question

Over-striking is when the hammer contacts the string at less than a 90 degree angle; impacting on the backside of the strike point.
Under-striking is when the hammer contacts the string at more than a 90 ° angle, impacting on the front side of the strike point.

For hammers that require enough material to be removed that it causes over-striking (due to the shortening of the bore distance),
elevating the top action to correct the geometry is possible. It will also raise the Let Off.  hopefully the capstans can be raised without losing purchase.

------------------------------
Regards,

Jon Page
mailto:jonpage@comcast.net
http://www.pianocapecod.com
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 06-17-2020 08:11
From: Alan Eder
Subject: Hammer reshaping vs hammer strike point question

Geoff,

You are, of course, correct about how the strike point effectively migrates when removing felt from the hammer crown while resurfacing. Precise strike point is fmost critical in the high treble and less so farther down the scale. That is one of the reasons there is usually a way to adjust the strike point at the treble cheek block.

Alan

------------------------------
Alan Eder, RPT
Herb Alpert School of Music
California Institute of the Arts
Valencia, CA
661.904.6483

Original Message:
Sent: 06-17-2020 02:18
From: Geoff Sykes
Subject: Hammer reshaping vs hammer strike point question

As I was reshaping a set of hammers today I was, as always, being very careful to maintain the original strike point. But it occurred to me that when reshaping hammers that original strike point is no longer valid. When the size of a hammer is reduced the hammer has to move further causing it to over strike. The new reshaped hammer now has a strike point that is slightly behind the original strike point. So, today's question: when reshaping hammers should a new strike point be considered or should one try to maintain the original strike point?

------------------------------
Geoff Sykes, RPT
Los Angeles CA
------------------------------

Geoff and all,
One way to compensate for the removed hammer felt is to raise the capstans.

Sent from my iPad
CarlPianoTech.com


Original Message:
Sent: 6/17/2020 2:19:00 AM
From: Geoff Sykes
Subject: Hammer reshaping vs hammer strike point question

As I was reshaping a set of hammers today I was, as always, being very careful to maintain the original strike point. But it occurred to me that when reshaping hammers that original strike point is no longer valid. When the size of a hammer is reduced the hammer has to move further causing it to over strike. The new reshaped hammer now has a strike point that is slightly behind the original strike point. So, today's question: when reshaping hammers should a new strike point be considered or should one try to maintain the original strike point?

------------------------------
Geoff Sykes, RPT
Los Angeles CA
------------------------------

Raising the capstans will not address the change in geometry (bore length). You can adjust blow distance but you have to elevate the top action to compensate for the loss of bore distance for the hammer to hit the strings at 90°. HCH + Bore Distance = String Height (not compensating for string plane angle).

------------------------------
Regards,

Jon Page
mailto:jonpage@comcast.net
http://www.pianocapecod.com
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 06-18-2020 14:00
From: Carl Lieberman
Subject: Hammer reshaping vs hammer strike point question

Geoff and all,
One way to compensate for the removed hammer felt is to raise the capstans.

Sent from my iPad
CarlPianoTech.com


Original Message:
Sent: 6/17/2020 2:19:00 AM
From: Geoff Sykes
Subject: Hammer reshaping vs hammer strike point question

As I was reshaping a set of hammers today I was, as always, being very careful to maintain the original strike point. But it occurred to me that when reshaping hammers that original strike point is no longer valid. When the size of a hammer is reduced the hammer has to move further causing it to over strike. The new reshaped hammer now has a strike point that is slightly behind the original strike point. So, today's question: when reshaping hammers should a new strike point be considered or should one try to maintain the original strike point?

------------------------------
Geoff Sykes, RPT
Los Angeles CA
------------------------------

The real answer IMO is to inform the client that the hammers have already worn to a compromised strike point, and while this process of reshaping "improves" things, it does not totally "correct" the situation. Reshaping is a temporary adjustment which can be accomplished once or twice or MAYBE three times (depending on circumstances), but is in essence delaying the inevitable (replacement). I would not lose sleep over the strike point difference. 

Pwg

------------------------------
Peter Grey
Stratham NH
603-686-2395
pianodoctor57@gmail.com
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 06-18-2020 14:26
From: Jon Page
Subject: Hammer reshaping vs hammer strike point question

Raising the capstans will not address the change in geometry (bore length). You can adjust blow distance but you have to elevate the top action to compensate for the loss of bore distance for the hammer to hit the strings at 90°. HCH + Bore Distance = String Height (not compensating for string plane angle).

------------------------------
Regards,

Jon Page
mailto:jonpage@comcast.net
http://www.pianocapecod.com

Original Message:
Sent: 06-18-2020 14:00
From: Carl Lieberman
Subject: Hammer reshaping vs hammer strike point question

Geoff and all,
One way to compensate for the removed hammer felt is to raise the capstans.

Sent from my iPad
CarlPianoTech.com


Original Message:
Sent: 6/17/2020 2:19:00 AM
From: Geoff Sykes
Subject: Hammer reshaping vs hammer strike point question

As I was reshaping a set of hammers today I was, as always, being very careful to maintain the original strike point. But it occurred to me that when reshaping hammers that original strike point is no longer valid. When the size of a hammer is reduced the hammer has to move further causing it to over strike. The new reshaped hammer now has a strike point that is slightly behind the original strike point. So, today's question: when reshaping hammers should a new strike point be considered or should one try to maintain the original strike point?

------------------------------
Geoff Sykes, RPT
Los Angeles CA
------------------------------