In response to Richard Friedman I'd like to make a correction to
my statement where I said the keydip was seven-eighths of an inch.
That's likely impossible on any instrument but I believe it might've
actually been 5/8 of an inch. I know it's over half an inch and,
as Richard pointed out, it definitely affects the playability with
the touch being rather blocky. (Although I actually like that a lot
-- it allows for a very big tone!)

There are definitely less key punchings (which I noticed years ago
on first inspection of them) and the restoration job to the piano
itself wasn't terrible. It was well re-strung, with new hammers for
1957 that still sound great, and really nice keytops redone, etc.
There are definitely some things that seem to be off: the player
action is a mess and it has garden hose inside, among other things.

I don't believe the hammers have been filed as they don't show any
sign of that. (As I mentioned it seems they're new, as pianos from
the 1920s that I've seen with original hammers usually have them
discolored and brittle and dry.)

In any case thank you, Richard, for your thoughts on this -- much
appreciated :)

With the piano now in Poland I'm hoping at some point to have new
hammers hung and voiced to match the old ones (the tenor is bright
but it's really nice) as they are brighter in the center (which is
where they sound good) and then softer as you move outward on the
scale. The player action is to blame as the outside pneumatics are
weaker and this piano was almost never hand-played. This causes
a particularly bad bass attack where you can hammer it to death
and won't get a bang out of it.

Piotr Barcz
thepiotrcorporation@gmail.com.geentroep [delete ".geentroep" to reply]