> Scary to >think, isn't it! ;-) Not for the calloused souls who've been following the List traffic the last few years. Just keep your head down and follow through. --- Gee, that sounds kind of profound in a Lee Travino sort of way, don't it? >Have you ever read Reblitz on this stuff. WONDERFUL resource, BUT! The >method presented for setting bearing is to look at the downbearing at the >agraffe/capo bar. I tried that. Wooooooooaaaaaaaa. Bad news. Downbearing at >the backscale is the prime area to look it think, but also to keep in mind >the angle of the bridge top (make sure the little rascal is in the same >plane as the average string plane, such that there is a little front bearing >and the back bearing. "BUT" ????????? I've got to admit I would be VASTLY impressed by any even remotely successful attempt to produce a lucid and workable method of setting bearing by looking at the agraffe/capo. I don't have the book, but it looks like I'm going to have to ask around and read this one for myself. In my admittedly narrow and fiercely ethnocentric world, the major bridge downbearing players are the bearing angle between the speaking segment and the segment on the bridge top, and the overall bearing measured between speaking segment and backscale. Both ought to be positive. A zero or negative bearing angle between the bridge top segment and the backscale is relatively non-critical compared to the front termination and overall. That doesn't mean it should be ignored in the rebuilding process, just that it's relatively unimportant in the diagnostic and evaluation phase. Ideally, like you said, both the front and rear bearing angles should be positive in practice. That's my story, and I'm sticking to it. Ron N
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC