Aftertouch Question Meas.

[Susan Kline]

Hi, Jim!

>In a message dated 3/29/98 6:58:25 PM, skline@proaxis.com wrote:
>
><<
>2.02 for the sharp (ratio of rear to front)
>1.99 for the natural (ratio of rear to front)
>
>Natural wins the speed test by a hair!  But it's neck and neck.
>>>
>
>Susan;
> If I understand your ratios you are saying that, for the sharps, a dip of
>10mm relates to a 4.95 mm rise in the capstan, and for the natural a 10mm dip
>relates to a 5.025mm rise in the capstan.  Am I following you here ?  If so
>which is the faster key?? (assuming both have ran their full cycle to
>catchment)

I would assume (but you see how well my assumptions are doing today!) that
since the natural rises farther for the same keydip that it's faster (and
wins the race by a hair.) On the other hand, the downweight would be just
slightly more. 

This is what you meant with your original question?

><<"Does the greater mass of the natural key make up for the tiny difference,
>by introducing more inertia?
>
>Or, does the leading make up for it? Which key is heavier, and what is the
>balance of each?">>

>  What this question is relating to is aftertouch and that is not affected as
>such by leading or inertia.    That is not to say that aftertouch is not
>affected in the performers perception by leading or inertia.  Besides Del or
>David are much better equipped to deal with this in a knowledgable manner.
>Jim Bryant (FL)

Well, any of you are much more qualified than I am! 

I suppose the weight is immaterial, though I thought it might affect the
feeling of speed a little ..

Yours,

Susan
Susan Kline
P.O. Box 1651
Philomath, OR 97370
skline@proaxis.com		

"Relax! Between the inconceivably big and the inconceivably
small, there's an area where everything is perfetly conceivable!"
		-- Ashleigh Brilliant