> I would like some clarification on this I have been asked to remove two > reproducer attachments to pianos, and I really don't like what I see. I > wonder if they were Pianodisc systems, so perhaps someone can tell me. You should be able to identify the unit by looking at the ID plate on the control unit or power supply. > Is this the system that cuts 3/4" off the back rail and requires that > a large cavity be cut in the keybed under the back of the keys? Does anybody > know how impossible it is to get a stable bedding on the keyframe when this > is done? This issue has been addressed by PianoDisc, though not until last year. > Is this the system that requires a hole drilled in the bottom of the > monkey to operate the sostenueto? and has a large, aluminum, U-shaped > bracket? Though not what I would call "U-shaped" this sounds more like QRS than PianoDisc. If there were felt pads under the tails of the keys where the solonoids contact, it's most certainly QRS. > The trapwork on these two are the cheapest, most poorly designed junk I > have seen on a piano. Both customers complained of poor pedal adjustment, > and lack of pianissimo playing. Both were quite happy with the total > replacement of the factory trapwork, and removal of the mechanism. This is largely in the hands of the installer. Though both PianoDisc and QRS have standardized trapwork modification as much as possible, the quality of the design exicution is ultimately determined by the installer. I think this is in part the reason why PianoDisc requires the installer to cover the (1 year) labor warranty. I haven't had complaints about my trapwork configurations from either owners or technicians. How about you Larry? Other than that, it's a matter of bias, isn't it? Modern retrofits maintain the original configuration of the piano _much_ better than the old pneumatic players. Mark Story, RPT Eastern Washington University mstory@ewu.edu
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC