even balance weight or something

[Isaac OLEG]

Interesting ideas, very ture, , I believe very much in acoustic of the
room and of the piano too (as elements of the piano touch ) . Not sure
that pianists could compare keyboards without a tone.


Best


Isaac OLEG

Entretien et reparation de pianos.

PianoTech
17 rue de Choisy
94400 VITRY sur SEINE
FRANCE
tel : 033 01 47 18 06 98
fax : 033 01 47 18 06 90
cell: 06 60 42 58 77

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : pianotech-bounces@ptg.org
> [mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org]De la
> part de David Love
> Envoye : mardi 29 avril 2003 03:41
> A : Pianotech
> Objet : Re: even balance weight or something
>
>
>
>
>  I'll stick my neck out and say that you could easily
> establish a standard.
> If you could poll all pianists about their likes and
> dislikes, have them
> sit down to a row of mute pianos and just feel the actions,
> my bet is that
> there would be a fairly normal bell shaped curve with a
> standard deviation
> that would bring 95%of the players within a fairly narrow
> range of balance
> weight and regulation specs.  Some of the outliers might actually be
> personal preference, some might be misperception.  Tastes
> may also have
> something to do with what people are used to.  Once you've
> learned to get
> what you need out of that 1970's B with more lead than wood
> in the keys, it
> feels normal to you. Over the past couple of years,  I have
> defaulted
> almost everything to a narrow range of 34 - 42 balance
> weight with front
> weight maximums in the 85 - 90% range depending on requests
> of lighter
> versus heavier and the particular set of hammers.
> Regulation specs have
> always taken priority and I have not deviated far from 10
> mm dip delivered
> by a SBR of 5.6 - 5.8.  If I had to choose a standard it
> would be smack in
> the middle:  38 balance weight, 5.7 SBR which produces a
> regulation of 10
> mm dip, front weights below maximums by 10 -15%, and
> whatever the SW zone
> that both fits into all that and is realistically
> acheivable with the set
> of hammers you have.   Setting the action up with an
> adjustable rep spring
> to get you that entire range quickly (if you wanted to)
> would mean that the
> rep spring would need to displace an average of 8 grams of
> BW (lower is
> better in my opinion).  With a midrange default of 38 BW,
> to get to 34 BW
> you would then have to go up to 12 grams for the rep
> spring, and for 42
> down to 4 grams leaving you a comfortable margin of error.
> My guess is
> that you would have very few complaints
>
>  David Love
>  davidlovepianos@earthlink.net
>
>
>  > [Original Message]
>  > From: Phillip Ford <fordpiano@earthlink.net>
>  > To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
>  > Date: 4/28/2003 1:47:43 PM
>  > Subject: Re: even balance weight or something
>  >
>  > I received this e-mail privately from Rich Olmsted and
> am responding to
> the list with his permission as I thought this was
> interesting and I think
> contributions to the list from pianists are valuable.
>  >
>  > At 08:22 AM 4/24/03 , you wrote:
>  > >Dear Phil,
>  > >
>  > >I appreciated your (below) remarks, and think you are
> right on about
> the
>  > >nature of the (real world) issue(s). From my own
> experience and in my
>  > >discussions with colleagues (pianists all). Some observations &
>  > >suppositions include:
>  > >
>  > >1.) Pianists may prefer more inertia/ heavier actions
> because, even if
>  > >less inertia/lighter might be personal preference, most pianos
> performed
>  > >on in the field (concert hall or other) would not match
> the pianists
>  > >personal preference so... better to be able to perform on the
>  > >stiffest/heaviest of actions (because an audience has
> no idea how good
> or
>  >
>  > >bad (responsive) the action is). They often assume the
> performance is
>  > >entirely about the pianist (with the possible exception
> of an out of
> tune
>  >
>  > >piano) in much the same way that they often assume an
> out of tune piano
>  > is
>  > >entirely about the tuner.
>  > >2.) Well practiced pianists tend to develop chops & can
> cope with
> greater
>  >
>  > >inertia (they can do the heavy lifting)
>  >
>  >          I was aware that many pianists take this
> approach of working on
> a heavy action so that they can build up trength and
> stamina to deal with
> heavy actions when they encounter them.  One of the unfortunate
> consequences of thisfor some pianists is physical damage.  Another
> unfortunate consequence is that some teachers take this as
> some sort of
> mantra and tell their students to buy a piano with a heavy
> action so that
> they can 'develop their strength', even if these students
> have no desire or
> ability to be professional pianists, and the result is a
> piano that's a
> chore to play.  Also, the upper limit of what defines a
> heavy action may be
> > > determined by a piano action that is poorly set up, so
> that the pianist
> is building himself up more than he would need to if he got
> to play on
> actions that were well designed or set up.  I'm reminded of
> a pianist (a
> young woman) I saw recently on TV playing the Rachmaninoff 3rd piano
> concerto, which she had presumably been practicing a lot.
> She had arms
> like a blacksmith's.
> > >          Also, my experience as an amateur pianist is
> that the best
> situation for me when playing on different pianos is for
> the piano to be
> similar to my personal piano.  I have trouble if the action is a lot
> heavier because my muscles are not built up to deal with
> it.  But, I also
> have problems controlling the action if it's a lot lighter.  If a
> professional constantly practices on a heavy action doesn't
> he have some
> control problems when he encounters a very light or fleet action?
>  >
>  >
>  > >These things aside,  I like choices and I don't mind
> change IF it
>  > produces
>  > >a great enough return. So there is a difference between
> the market for
>  > >'performing' pianists (performers at multiple venues),
> and the market
> for
>  >
>  > >pianists who almost exclusively perform on their own instrument.
>  > >
>  > >What is difficult to manage is having the action change
>  > >significantly/unpredictibly with every piano/venue.
>  > >
>  > >Maybe we (pianists) don't have much choice. I'm
> wondering if having
> more
>  > >choices would just create another whole set of issues,
> but I think more
>  > >choices has the potential to educate, AND EDUCATION IS KEY !!!!
>  > >
>  > >Best, Rich Olmsted
>  >
>  >
>  > Good points.  The sort of range of choices that I was
> talking about
> really only make sense for pianists' personal nstruments or
> for those very
> few artists that get to travel with an instrument.  It
> would be interesting
> to see what pianists would end up choosing for themselves
> if they were
> given some options.  Performing pianists of necessity
> desire uniformity
> from instrument to instrument, since they are required to
> play on so many
> different instruments.  I suppose their ideal would be a
> sort of 'standard'
> > > action that would be the same from piano to piano.  But
> what should
> this standard action be like?  The technical community is
> gaining the
> knowledge to set actions up to give desired results rather than take
> whatever results from putting a bunch of action parts
> together.  Perhaps
> it's time to start talking about a standard action setup,
> just as we have a
> standard pitch.  Performing artists would then not have
> surprises when they
> showed
> > > up to play on yet another instrument unknown to them.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Phil Ford
> > >
> > > >Phil Ford wrote:
> > > >I think this shows that different pianists have
> different ideas about
> how
> > >
> > > >pianos ought to feel.  I think we have been lead to
> believe that there
> is
> > >
> > > >an ideal setup and we just have to find it.  I wonder
> if we shouldn't
> be
> > > >working towards having the ability to vary the feel of
> the actions more
> > > in
> > > >a quantifiable way to give pianists more choice. Some
> might like
> heavier,
> > >
> > > >some lighter.  Some more inertia, some less. Some
> evenness from one end
> > > >to the other, others a graduation from one end to the
> other, etc. Now,
> to
> > >
> > > >the extent that we give them any choice at all, it
> seems to be - you
> can
> > > >have this balance weight or that one.  Sort of like
> saying, what
> flavor
> > > >would you like, vanilla or french vanilla.  I also
> wonder if having
> some
> > > >of these options might change their tastes somewhat.
> I sometimes hear
> > > >technicians say that pianists like 10 mm keydip, heavy
> actions, lots
> of
> > > >inertia,
> > > >etc.  Not surprising, since that's what most of them
> play on all the
> > > >time.  They don't have much choice.  And most of them
> don't like
> > > >change.  But if they were given a chance to live with
> some other
> setups I
> > >
> > > >wonder if they wouldn't end up preferring them.  (I
> suppose this is a
> bit
> > >
> > > >like the temperament discussions).
> > >
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > pianotech list info:
https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives



_______________________________________________
pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives