Reply to: RE>>advice on action parts
Vince- Your question about dip is a good one. I find that pianists do not mind key travel that is in the 0.390" to 0.40" range. In fact, if you're working with a Steinway that has post '84 shanks and a 2 to 1 key ratio, you'll probably have to regulate with a key dip in that range. Plain and simple, more mechanical advantage in an action means more key travel.
As far as our "D" with the changed capstan position, I did samples to make sure the dip was not over 0.40"; and though the change did increase key travel, no one ever mentioned anything about it.
Ken Sloane, Oberlin Conservatory
--------------------------------------
Date: 3/22/99 3.58 PM
To: Kenneth Sloane
From: caut@ptg.org
Ken,
Did you find the increased dip to be a problem?
At 02:40 PM 3/21/99 -0500, you wrote:
> Reply to: RE>advice on action parts
>However, this is less true for nine foot pianos with their longer keys
because
the longer key provides additional wood that introduces more inertia. This was
proven rather dramatically to me with a "D" here at Oberlin that was built in
1987, had post 1984 shanks (17mm action center to knuckle distance), good
upweight/downweight specs, and was always perceived as being heavy. At this
moment, I can't find my notes on that piano that would tell me what the key
ratio average was; but, suffice to say, that it was significantly below 2
to 1.
>
>By moving the capstans to get a better key ratio -- you also have to move the
wippen heel to match the new capstan position -- the piano suddenly felt
light,
so much so that I wished I had not moved the capstans so much. Nothing else
was
changed other than the capstan and wippen heel position (the latter gives the
wippen more mechanical advantage also) and now people were saying the piano
was
a little on the light side.
>
>Ken Sloane, Oberlin Conservatory
>
Vince
<mailto:vince@byu.edu>
Visit the web page for the Pacific Northwest Conference at:
<www.pnwpianoconf.com>
******************* NOTE *******************
There may be important message content
contained in the following MIME Information.
********************************************
------------------ MIME Information follows ------------------
--=====================_20668780==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
<<<<<< See above "Message Body" >>>>>>
--=====================_20668780==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
<html><div>Ken,</div>
<div>Did you find the increased dip to be a problem?</div>
<br>
<div>At 02:40 PM 3/21/99 -0500, you wrote:</div>
<div>> Reply to:
RE>advice on action parts</div>
<br>
<div>>However, this is less true for nine foot pianos with their
longer keys because the longer key provides additional wood that
introduces more inertia. This was proven rather dramatically to me with a
"D" here at Oberlin that was built in 1987, had post 1984
shanks (17mm action center to knuckle distance), good upweight/downweight
specs, and was always perceived as being heavy. At this moment, I can't
find my notes on that piano that would tell me what the key ratio average
was; but, suffice to say, that it was significantly below 2 to 1.</div>
<div>></div>
<div>>By moving the capstans to get a better key ratio -- you also
have to move the wippen heel to match the new capstan position -- the
piano suddenly felt light, so much so that I wished I had not moved the
capstans so much. Nothing else was changed other than the capstan and
wippen heel position (the latter gives the wippen more mechanical
advantage also) and now people were saying the piano was a little on the
light side.</div>
<div>></div>
<div>>Ken Sloane, Oberlin Conservatory</div>
<div>></div>
<br>
<b>Vince<br>
</b><i><<a href="mailto:vince@byu.edu" eudora="autourl">mailto:vince@byu.edu</a>><br>
</i>Visit the web page for the Pacific Northwest Conference at: <br>
<<a href="http://www.pnwpianoconf.com/" eudora="autourl">www.pnwpianoconf.com</a>>
</html>
--=====================_20668780==_.ALT--
------------------ RFC822 Header Follows ------------------
Received: by qmgate.cc.oberlin.edu with ADMIN;22 Mar 1999 15:57:37 -0500
Received: (from majordomo@localhost)
by bridget.rudoff.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA06745
for caut-outgoing; Mon, 22 Mar 1999 13:54:58 -0700 (MST)
Received: from email2.byu.edu (SYSTEM@email2.byu.edu [128.187.22.134])
by bridget.rudoff.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA06741
for <caut@ptg.org>; Mon, 22 Mar 1999 13:54:46 -0700 (MST)
Received: from vmrykalo.byu.edu
("port 1090"@russnielson.byu.edu [128.187.70.51])
by EMAIL1.BYU.EDU (PMDF V5.2-31 #31181)
with SMTP id <01J94SYHMO408Y891G@EMAIL1.BYU.EDU> for caut@ptg.org; Mon,
22 Mar 1999 13:53:53 MST
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1999 13:55:21 -0700
From: Vince Mrykalo <Vince@byu.edu>
Subject: Re: advice on action parts
In-reply-to: <n1290094992.7621@qmgate.cc.oberlin.edu>
X-Sender: vem@email.byu.edu
To: caut@ptg.org
Message-id: <01J94SYHNXBM8Y891G@EMAIL1.BYU.EDU>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0.2
Content-type: multipart/alternative; types="text/plain,text/html";
boundary="=====================_20668780==_.ALT"
Sender: owner-caut@ptg.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: caut@ptg.org
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC