CAUT

Hi, everyone. I have a head scratcher to deal with during this enforced break from university work (on campus, anyway).  The subject is an older (#52094) Henry F. Miller grand that is in a voice professor's studio.  The staff accompanist that plays it has continually complained that the thing is "clunky", and "plays like a truck" " Awful"  "I hate it!!"  are his comments.  I have been looking at it and scratching my head.  Attached are some pictures of the #88 hammer, shank.
​    In checking the measurements of some rudimentary action parameters, some things stick out to me.  The hammer is bored too long by like 1/4 inch from what the string height-center pin distance should be, with no rake.  The shank shows an area below the hammer that suggests that these hammers were added to old shanks, and hung at a greater hanging distance than previous.  And yet the strike point grooves are pretty much in line with where a proper centering should be (not over or under centering).  The shanks have a 17 MM knuckle distance, with an 11 MM knuckle size.  
    Things I noted in measuring (I can't find where I put the previous measurements, but I remember that none of the things are radically out of line with what is considered "normal"). were the dip is about 10mm,  let off and all that is pretty normal,  key ratio is pretty good.  The only thing that I might want to mess with is the overall action ratio is a little on the high side, closer to a high 5's or 6 to 1 (Dale Erwin device).
   I am tempted to just taper and tail the hammers (trim the weight), and see what happens, but I am perplexed by the pictures and possible scenarios of how and why that happened.  I know that in the 80's, it was kind of in vogue to put these big, massive hammers on because they made this big tone, and I have seen this on some other pianos at the university that he dealt with years ago.  I  spent many hours on a Steinway A, to make it playable about a year ago.  Any thoughts would be appreciated.

------------------------------
Clark Sprague
Bowling Green OH
419-352-2198
------------------------------

My procedure would be to reshape on an oscillating spindle sander. Then taper the hammers and arc the tails. Graduate their Strike weight.
With resurfacing, the bore distance will reduce a little; it might be enough for the SH-HCH not to be of great concern.
If the hammers are still too long, notch the cleats with a multitool on a riser (done it a few times with success).
You might have to relocate the top action back a little to maintain the Strike Point and that will lower the AR a bit.
All this is very doable if the jack is being pressed into the rep lever stop felt now. Excessive jack travel is wasted energy.



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

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

Original Message:
Sent: 03-24-2020 13:38
From: Clark Sprague
Subject: Henry F. Miller Grand Piano

Hi, everyone. I have a head scratcher to deal with during this enforced break from university work (on campus, anyway).  The subject is an older (#52094) Henry F. Miller grand that is in a voice professor's studio.  The staff accompanist that plays it has continually complained that the thing is "clunky", and "plays like a truck" " Awful"  "I hate it!!"  are his comments.  I have been looking at it and scratching my head.  Attached are some pictures of the #88 hammer, shank.
​    In checking the measurements of some rudimentary action parameters, some things stick out to me.  The hammer is bored too long by like 1/4 inch from what the string height-center pin distance should be, with no rake.  The shank shows an area below the hammer that suggests that these hammers were added to old shanks, and hung at a greater hanging distance than previous.  And yet the strike point grooves are pretty much in line with where a proper centering should be (not over or under centering).  The shanks have a 17 MM knuckle distance, with an 11 MM knuckle size.
    Things I noted in measuring (I can't find where I put the previous measurements, but I remember that none of the things are radically out of line with what is considered "normal"). were the dip is about 10mm,  let off and all that is pretty normal,  key ratio is pretty good.  The only thing that I might want to mess with is the overall action ratio is a little on the high side, closer to a high 5's or 6 to 1 (Dale Erwin device).
   I am tempted to just taper and tail the hammers (trim the weight), and see what happens, but I am perplexed by the pictures and possible scenarios of how and why that happened.  I know that in the 80's, it was kind of in vogue to put these big, massive hammers on because they made this big tone, and I have seen this on some other pianos at the university that he dealt with years ago.  I  spent many hours on a Steinway A, to make it playable about a year ago.  Any thoughts would be appreciated.

------------------------------
Clark Sprague
Bowling Green OH
419-352-2198
------------------------------