That might work with a single note action for both. But, seeing the consistency of three notes really tells the examiner that you know what you are doing. If just a single note on a grand, it should at least have the pedal mechanisms. I like the three note vertical model for some reason. I had to (yes, I'm admitting this) take it more than once!! :>) It was far harder than the grand reg test! (I ran out of time the first go around) In real life, we don't get to regulate verticals more than grands, simply IMHO due to the fact that grand owners are more demanding, have more financial means to do it, or whatever. PW From: "Jeff Tanner" <tannertuner at bellsouth.net> To: <caut at ptg.org> Date: 07/24/2009 05:15 PM Subject: Re: [CAUT] Cool grand action models/ RPT testing Hey Paul, Great question. I have a similar "concern" with the testing, but not so much with how many notes are involved as much as what you're given to start with. The grand portion comes from a regulating-what-you've-got starting point, while the vertical portion is more from the perspective of rebuilding from scratch. I didn't mind that so much as that when you're rebuilding, and figuring out proportions, you really aren't being timed. Being timed while figuring out proportions bothered me a bit, and took up most of my time on that section. I scored well on the grand, but struggled on the vertical portion for that reason. It's just something we don't do all that often and success or failure depended on something one rarely encounters. It would have made more sense to me to give me a vertical action model out of regulation -- not completely disassembled and with no specs. That's what we run into - verticals that need regulation, not rebuilding from scratch. Anymore, it doesn't make sense to rebuild a vertical action unless it is a particularly special one, and that is very rare. Makes more sense to me to test what we run into more often. As far as single versus multiples, I don't see why we need multiples on either. If you can do one, you ought to be able to match the other 87. To me, multiples on the vertical portion was just extra time taken up that could be spent on getting one right. But I guess I can see maybe damper timing with the pedal being about the only thing that needs to be coordinated. It's not like we're weighing off the action, though, so consistency from note to note really comes down to your ability to get the first one good and then just reproducing that. My thoughts, Jeff Tanner ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul T Williams To: caut at ptg.org Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 4:50 PM Subject: Re: [CAUT] Cool grand action models/ RPT testing Too bad. I would only need a max of 6. That's my class limit due to space....It would be great for our occasional "Associates Days" we hold for our local associates wishing to get to the RPT classification. Really, I would only want 3 or 4. I just think that a single grand note action is not comparable to the vertical testing unit. Why do we not require at least a 3-note grand action model with pedals, sos pedal and unacorda pedal? One of the most important issues in great grand action regulation is consistency from note to note!! It really doesn't make sense that the grand action test is actually easier than the vertical action reg test. I would think that, in reality, the grand action reg test be harder than the vertical as that's where the most demanding of customers and artists are. Really, what vertical piano owner (other than a physical space issue) is really as demanding on proper regulation as those owning a high-end grand..or any grand, if they can't afford a high-end grand, but are still outstanding pianists? This has always been a question in my crazy brain! Any examiners out there that can add something to why these standards have been set? I'm sure this will turn into a great discussion! I'm all eyes! I'm truly interested in where these testing standards were set and why... Just a thought...Shields up! Paul From: reggaepass at aol.com To: caut at ptg.org Date: 07/24/2009 02:50 PM Subject: Re: [CAUT] Cool grand action models >From what I was told, they were made specially for the Renner damper class (which Schimmel, somehow, has a finger in). Additional units may not be available, unless a sufficient quantity were to be ordered. Alan Eder -----Original Message----- From: Paul T Williams <pwilliams4 at unlnotes.unl.edu> To: caut at ptg.org Sent: Fri, Jul 24, 2009 11:35 am Subject: Re: [CAUT] Cool grand action models Those were the ones! I didn't see anything in my Renner stuff here. I'll look into Schimmel. They're probably spendy I'll bet! Thanks, Alan Paul From: reggaepass at aol.com To: caut at ptg.org Date: 07/24/2009 01:18 PM Subject: Re: [CAUT] Cool grand action models Paul, if you are referring to the multi-note action models used in the hands-on damper class taught by Renner USA, I was told that those were made by Schimmel. Alan Eder -----Original Message----- From: Fred Sturm <fssturm at unm.edu> To: caut at ptg.org Sent: Thu, Jul 23, 2009 10:54 am Subject: Re: [CAUT] Cool grand action models Renner, I believe. Regards, Fred Sturm University of New Mexico fssturm at unm.edu On Jul 23, 2009, at 9:08 AM, Paul T Williams wrote: Hi All, I was checking out the pics on the blog from GR. That hands-on class that had all those multi-note grand action models look very cool. Who makes them, or who know where to get some? I would really like to use them for my Univ class I teach every spring and could teach students better than using the single note models I have. Thanks! Wish I could have been there! Paul = -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/caut.php/attachments/20090725/5529d471/attachment.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC