action geometry

[richard west]

I have been following the gometry posts with intense
interest and look forward to Ken Sloan's class and the CAUT meeting
where this will all come up yet again.  What seems to be lacking in
all the discussion is a "unified theory of action geometry."  This
strikes me as strange since the industry has had over 150 years to
"get it right," and that modern actions seem to the naked eye to look
more and more alike pointing to the fact that there is indeed a "good
geometry" that is going to give the pianist the most power, control,
and repetition.

The questions that I have are as follows:

1.  Is Pfeiffer the only man that has attempted to write a complete
treatise on action geometry?  I know the Germans have materials that
are used to train Journeymen and Masters but are these available to us
here in the States, even in German?
2.  When Mr. Emerson says to the effect,"When in doubt, go with the
specs."  What are the specs--I mean *all* of them?  We can get shank
length, action spread, and action regulation specs, but what about
actual hammer weight, and the various ratios that David Stanwood is
working with?  Are these numbers available from the various
manufacturers?
3.  What happens between the action designers desk and the pianos we
work on?  Is it quality control that breaks down and introduces
geometry changes that were not intended?  Does this mean that good
action geometry is an accident of manufacturing regardless of good
intentions?  Or are pianos inherently unpredictable?  I know no two
plates are exactly alike so does that mean no two pianos are exactly
alike, hence the action geometry discrepencies?
4.  Am I naive/ignorant to imagine manufacturers would necessarily
choose to use an ideal action geometry even on paper.  If there was
only one set of specs, all the manufacturers would be using them and
there wouldn't be a unique feature to sell to the customer.  The
competive world of sales demands some way to make a product that is
unique regardless of whether it is better or not.  Forgive me if that
sounds cynical; I'm just asking.
5.  Are we, as piano technicians, reinventing the wheel?  It seems we
are finally discovering action geometry as the latest thing in
rebuilding.  Manufactureres have been inventing the wheel, so to
speak, for centuries.  Why aren't we working with them, or they with
us?  Is it that bugaboo competive edge again?  Rebuilding is, after
all, a threat to new piano sales.  I've heard it said that rebuilders
are the biggest competition to manufacturers.  Given that there are
millions of good old rebuildable grands out there, they have a point.
That's all for now.  I'll be listening/reading/cogitating etc.


Richard West
University of Nebrasa