Key Leads and Inertia

[Bill Ballard]

At 8:27 AM +0200 6/12/03, Richard Brekne wrote:
>In point of fact... the whole method provides an excellent tool for 
>finding an smoothing certain aspects of geometric issues commonly 
>overlooked.

This was what i was referring to. In providing note-by-note SWRs (did 
I get that right?), the Stanwood systems offers the user so inclined 
to tune up the outliers. Yes, this is nothing more than a magnifying 
glass with which to pick nits. But it allows the user so inclined to 
base his balancing of the action on smooth geometry. The MBA doesn't 
do that and a DW-based approach as we know is clueless.

You're right: fine tuning SWRs is not necessary, once the SWR has on 
a more general level been matched to the SW. The job of reconciling 
the discrepancies between FW and BW is easily done by a helper 
spring. I'd imagine that given the relatively small size of these 
discrepancies, this would be the helper spring's least controversial 
use.

At 8:39 AM +0200 6/12/03, Richard Brekne wrote:
>I agree this is one thing that sticks out, and interestingly so. 
>Also however, is
>the potential for being able to understand the behaviour of the action mass as
>felt at the front of the key better.

What did you have in mind as far as the behavior of action mass, 
beyond the relationship of the force applied to the key and the 
acceleration it produces in the hammer. Were you pointing in the 
direction of what a pianist might report (as opposed to what lab 
instruments might read)?

>Tho in the end... both of these may very well
>turn out to be a moot point. With the present action design, we are 
>not going to
>get away from the present choices put in front of us regarding 
>choice of hammer
>weight and counterbalancing schemes.

Complementing these present choices are the generations of pianists 
who have trained on the conventional action, and who might not know 
how to handle an action with radically different inertia and friction 
could we come up with it.

Bill Ballard RPT
NH Chapter, P.T.G.

"I go, two plus like, three is pretty much totally five. Whatever"
     ...........The new math
+++++++++++++++++++++