Lighter or Heavier ?

[Erwinspiano@AOL.COM]

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
In a message dated 7/12/2002 4:20:20 PM Pacific Daylight Time,=20
Richard.Brekne@grieg.uib.no writes:


> Subj:Re: Lighter or Heavier ?=20
> Date:7/12/2002 4:20:20 PM Pacific Daylight Time
> From:<A HREF=3D"mailto:Richard.Brekne@grieg.uib.no">Richard.Brekne@grieg.u=
ib.no</A>
> Reply-to:<A HREF=3D"mailto:pianotech@ptg.org">pianotech@ptg.org</A>
> To:<A HREF=3D"mailto:pianotech@ptg.org">pianotech@ptg.org</A>
> Sent from the Internet=20
>=20
>         Hey Ric

       I followed this only briefly. Bussssy week. Oh my goodness! Any way=20
There is an experience I've had a few times with some actions where the key=20
ratios and action ratios were really good. Without getting into many=20
measurements just let me say that the effect was that even though static dow=
n=20
weights approached 60 down on my Symphony Stwy D (1940) and the upweights=20
were a nice snappy 28-30. No one has ever complained about the touch as bein=
g=20
heavy.=20
   John O' Connor played it a time or two as well as others. and never a=20
complaint about the touch being heavy.  Seems to handle rapid passage work=20
effortlessly. It has some lead closer to the balance rail as it's a=20
accelerated action.     =20
     I've also learned  from installing new key sets with corrected key=20
ratios that less lead is used and similar results are attained. I believe =20
some lead is required  to give the piansit some semblance of  a "the normal=20
feel" related to inertia and that some inertia IMO is desirable in a piano=20
action. Physics says were going to have some like it or not but is better=20
managed with efficient leverages.  When some of these systems are right it's=
=20
like a supercharged V-8.
  My point is that the down weight upweight discussion takes on an entirely=20
different parameters when things are set up right as opposed to the funky ke=
y=20
and action geometry we deal with day in and out. Bottom line is that some=20
action.key systems static weights may seem high ( 60 over 30 ) but the=20
dynamic effect when the keys are in motion tells an entirely different and=20
pleasant story.
  Does that make sense to any one but me?
     >>>>Dale Erwin>>>>>>>

>=20
> Thanks again Ed and Dave... and St=E9phane for your interest
>=20
> Seems like we have two ideas about how inertia levels affect
> the touch of the piano. On the one hand we've said several
> times the the higher the inertia the slower the action
> repetition... and this has been equated loosely with terms
> like sluggishness and then from this perspective, heaviness.
> Then on the other hand a bit more lead is said to perhaps
> lead to a lighter "feel" due to the help inertia lends ones
> the key is in motion.
>=20
> Interesting and to some degree conflicting lines of
> thinking. All and all it leads one to think that Stanwood
> ideas are fine.... a great refinement in relation to simple
> DW/UW measurements.. but perhaps should be refined further
> to somehow put a number on inertia .... inertia zones
> perhaps.
>=20
> I agree tho in the answers you two kindly voluntered that
> DW/UW has a direct relationship to "touch" or "feel", yet
> that these are also affected by other relationships.=20
>=20
> Thanks again... would have liked to heard from others...
> but. :)
>=20
> Cheers
> RicB
>=20


---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/3a/fb/43/47/attachment.htm

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--