Grand Regulation Compromises

[Tom Servinsky]

Terry,
I too have to chime in hear.
Bench regulation, unless set up incredibly well designed keybed simulating
device, you are increasing the time needed to regulate. You'll quickly learn
that having to re-regulate your regulating job will cost you time and money.
Actions in the piano will yield different parameters than on a bench, again,
that's if you don't have a good simulating device.  Regulating at the piano,
all in all, is the way to go. And actually once you get the hang of
regulating at the piano on site, things go rather smoothly and predictable.
There is nothing more frustrating discovering that beautiful key leveling
you did on the bench become a sloppy tidal wave in the piano.
Tom Servinsky,RPT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kjell Sverre Fardal" <ksfardal@online.no>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 5:52 PM
Subject: SV: Grand Regulation Compromises


> Hi, Terry!
>
> I have been waiting for someone to comment "bench-regualtion", but it
seems
> I have to do it ...;)
>
> First of all: I prefer to regulate the grand-action in the piano. This is
> the only way I feel I can do the best job. Two reasons for that: a) the
> keyframe is (in some cases...)fitted to the keybed, and not to my
> work-bench, and b) I can make decissions on how to regulate by making
> samples, and then play the piano to see how it worked out.
>
> If I have to do a "low-budget-job" (is this the case here?), I prefer to
> make samples in all sections (filing test-hammers, then doing all
regulating
> and testing) before I take the action to my workshop and finish the work
> there.
>
> All these inch-measurements doesn`t tell me very much (I prefer mm !), but
> as others have said, I would give key-dip a certain priority (max. 10 mm
on
> a small grand), and then make the compromises with blow-distance AND (if
> nescessary) let-off, to get the aftertouch you want.
>
> My motto: "The best action-work is done in bed"    (keybed  :-)
>
> Just some thoughts from another Norwegian...
>
>
> Kjell Sverre Fardal, NPTF
> ksfardal@online.no
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Opprinnelig melding-----
> Fra: owner-pianotech@ptg.org [mailto:owner-pianotech@ptg.org]På vegne av
> Farrell
> Sendt: 28. november 2001 22:38
> Til: pianotech@ptg.org
> Emne: Re: Grand Regulation Compromises
>
>
> Thanks Phil, that's the way I am leaning. But not being a player, I don't
> have a great feel for how much dip is too much dip. To the best of my
> knowledge, 0.375" to 0.44" would be the normal range of dip, with most
> pianos specking out around 0.4". Where do you draw the line on the high
> side? If I set dip at 0.4", my blow distance will be 1-1/2". If I set dip
at
> 0.44" or 0.45", I can accommodate a blow distance of 1-3/4". But isn't a
dip
> of 0.45" a bit much for most players? Does this depend on the size of
piano?
> Is it maybe that professional musicians that are capable of taking control
> of the keyboard may like a deeper dip of say 0.43", but little Mrs.
> Playlightly-and-not-too-good-at-that may prefer a more shallow dip???
>
> I guess that is what my main question is, where do you draw the line on
dip
> in a case like this (spec at 3/8" - who knows why - little crummy piano -
no
> professional musician involved)? Thanks
>
> Terry Farrell
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Phil Bondi" <tito@PhilBondi.com>
> To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 1:03 PM
> Subject: Re: Grand Regulation Compromises
>
>
> > Terry, I am "Dip Priority"..I've had a few facing me like you have..you
> have
> > to make a compromise somewhere..but I use dip as my priority.
> >
> > What has happened to me in the past is you set the blow distance more
> > shallow to keep the aftertouch and let-off somewhere resembling
> 'specs'..but
> > as you know, 'specs' can be somewhat deceiving, too. Use them as a
guide,
> > not a rule.
> >
> > Listen to me..the voice of experience?!?!?
> >
> > Phil
> >
>
>
>