JP, With one, small, exception, I really enjoy reading your posts, there is always something there to chew on. The exception is that eecummings has been dead for some time, and the penchant you seem to have for ignoring common rules of capitalization, punctuation and grammar make what are otherwise worthwhile comments and observations difficult to read. I would hate to reach the point of arbitrarily discarding someone else's thought and labor based on such persnickity criteria. In my experience, the answer to your question is that the Baldwin 46" (used to be the model 243) was never designed as a musicians piano. They were designed to meet the old MENC guidelines for institutional pianos, and as such had to be virtually indestructible, not musical. Besides, most uprights are designed for the key to have to come all the way up for "repetition", the few exceptions have been long out of manufacture, except for the Fandrich, and I'm not sure about that, and I'm sure Del will fill us in. Anyway, this is truly intended as constructive. Please do keep posting! Horace At 10:41 AM 2/14/97 -0500, you wrote: >hello all, > since were on the subject of repetition ,i recently regulated a >baldwin 46" console from around the 1980s. I noticed in order to get correct > repetition the key had to be lifted completly up.All the jacks return >properly, and there is nothing more to find to regulate to change this,i went >over everything! then i recently spoke to a former steinway tech, who told me >that they were designed that way .in order to get repetition the key has to >completly be lifted.A really good pianist can execute it properly.I have >regulated many consoles that were not like this, only on this baldwin >console.Has anyone ever seen this? > jptuner > > Horace Greeley Ars langa, Vita brevis Stanford University email: hgreeley@leland.stanford.edu voice mail: 415.725.9062 LiNCS help line: 415.725.4627
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC