In a message dated Sun, 7 Apr 2002 11:58:01 PM Eastern Daylight Time, "Bradley M. Snook" <bsnook@pacbell.net> writes: >Humm . . . I know that this is a slightly different question, but what is >wrong with setting the let-off as high as possible? I have a 9-foot at home >that I try to keep as high as possible. I usually set the let-off so that >the hammers, when slowly lifted a second time, no longer touch/mute the >string. This is generally much less that 1/16. Understandably this could >only be used for 'concert level' pianos that are constantly monitored. > >Am I missing something? Isn't closer better? Just as long as the hammers >don't block the strings. I really don't get the 'three times the thickness >of the core' thing. That seems like a lot of lost power and control. Or is >that just a good 'standard' for pianos that are never regulated? > >Bradley M. Snook > > Bradley, you make a good point for a high performance piano under comprehensive technical care or a piano that happens to have a technician in the house. Under normal circumstances there are times when due to humidity swings a very close let off can cause the hammers to block. I wonder if anyone on the list has tried to measure the "power loss" associated with wider let off dimensions? David Koelaer DFW
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC