One thing that did just occur to me: I was talking to the technical rep of Beckstein a couple years ago, and asked him if he wouldn't love to have Beckstein adopt the new Renner screw aadjustable butterfly wipps (provided as retrofit for Steinways by Renner USA). He said he wasn't sure that design was an improvement. As he explained it, when the standard butterfly is compressed, the spring arm slides out along the balancier, and thus it not only has the additional stored energy from being compressed, but also has an additional leverage advantage (it's acting at a point farther from the fulcrum). I guess meaning that the is "added zip" at the very beginning of the repetition function, providing a speed advantage. I have to say I was a bit skeptical that such a small leverage advantage would have a perceptible impact, but maybe it does. If this is one of the major reasons the butterfly has supplanted other designs, then the "Renner improved" is actually a step backward. Regards, Fred Sturm University of New Mexico --On Friday, April 9, 2004 12:26 PM -0400 Wimblees@aol.com wrote: > I can understand that it might be more stable, but, as you said, only > when it is regulated properly. But because it is so difficult to get a > precise regulation on a butterfly, as opposed to the screw adjusted reps, > it would seem to me that having a rep that can be adjusted much closer, > and easier, would be preferred. But maybe only by technicians, and not > pianists. > Wim
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC