Weird Frontweights

[Farrell]

What an interesting concept! I am in NO way trying to put words in Del's
mouth - I am very interested in hearing his reply to you question. I will
speculate a bit though. I do not believe that in any way his comments
suggest Precision Touchweight is not valid. I believe his comments are
independent of Precision Touchweight, and he is simply stating that if an
action/belly is precisely engineered AND manufactured, that BWs, WBW, FWs,
other action geometry can be very predictable and as such, leading can
indeed be very predictable. I further suggest he is suggesting that a given
quality piano can be manufactured in such a way to give FWs (not counting
variances in action center friction) within a set range (and thus,
predictable leading). The range would simply depend on natural variations in
material densities, and whatever engineering and manufacturing tolerances
were allowed (and of course, these would be known).

In practice, certainly the Precision Touchweight has the potential to yield
more accurate results. But compared to the comparatively haphazard methods
of action/belly manufacturing in many plants, Del's engineered method would
yield much more accurate results than the 'individually weighing off keys' -
and likely up to a standard acceptable to most of the piano-buying public -
at a cost (just guessing here) of no more (maybe less?) than 'individually
weighing off keys' . But just think of the next time you do Stanwood's
Precision Touchweight on a piano that was engineered/manufactured to within
close tolerances like Del is suggesting (I think).

I hope I am not stepping on your toes Del. Just speculating and so very
interested in this subject. Ok, now put me in my place!

Terry Farrell

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Brekne" <rbrekne@broadpark.no>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2001 7:42 AM
Subject: Re: Weird Frontweights


>
>
> Delwin D Fandrich wrote:>
>
> > > I seem to remember that for some interval during the last
> > > fifteen years, Baldwin was sending its smaller grands out with 100%
> > > of their leading set by pattern.
> > > -----------------------------------------------------
> >
> > As they should be. At least in any piano purporting to be of good
musical
> > quality.
> >
>
> hmmm.....not quite sure I buy this...read on.
>
> > This whole idea of 'individually weighing off keys' is one that should
have
> > died some decades back just as soon as the concept of uniform touch was
> > figured out. It was a bad idea when it was conceived and it remains a
bad
> > idea.
> >
>
> First, I would like to have this concept of "uniform touch" as you use it
> defined. Seems to me that weighing of individual keys is neccessary to
achieve
> a truly even set of FW's.
>
> >
> > It is a practice of using lead to make up for variations in the
> > action--mostly those of irregular friction--so that static downweight is
> > uniform. But static downweight is a parameter of complete inconsequence
to
> > the pianist.
>
> Exactly so.... at least it WAS so... but only if it is done in relation to
> static downweight. If done relative to Stannwoods method you would seem to
have
> an entirely different condition. Exactly matching SW's, WBW,  FW's  with
> correct and consistant leverage leave friction as the only element left
that
> can show variances.... or what ? And if so then said friction problems are
easy
> to track down and even out also.
>
> >
> > The best way to set key leading is to engineer it for a specific
action/key
> > combination and then use static downweight tests as a troubleshooting
guide
> > to tell the factory technician where to look for problems. The idea, of
> > course, is that the problems should be fixed before the piano is
shipped.
> >
> > Del
>
> The only way a static downweight test can be of value is if said test can
give
> you information that can indeed be a help in trouble shooting. Unless you
know
> ahead of time that at least certain key parameters are right on the
button,
> variances of DW can mean just about anything.  I have difficulty in seeing
that
> laying out a pattern for leads that should be installed in all specific
models
> of a particular piano make can achieve this more then roughly.  Are you
saying
> that such pattern laying will result in an a very even FW curve with no
> variances of over 2 or 3 grams ?... Even that would be relatively rough I
would
> think.
>
> Curious to hear more of what would on the surface of it seem to be the
first
> anti-Stannwood posting I have read.
>
> --
> Richard Brekne
> RPT, N.P.T.F.
> Bergen, Norway
> mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no
>
>