regulation extremes?

[Kevin E. Ramsey]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
Bob, first of all, you can't just "dive in" like that. Either the key =
dip has to be absolutely even, or at least the Hammer Line should be. =
You can't really regulate anything without first setting up the =
,,,,,,,well, what I call the "internal whippen relationship."  The jack =
has to be lined up with the back of the knuckle-core, the jack window =
has to be correct, the keybed has to be bedded. I would at that time set =
the let-off and drop.  (You say it has a drop of 4 mm's? Sacre Bleu!)   =
Perhaps then you can start to evaluate the situation you're looking at.
    As for the key dip being correctly set up,, yeah, it may have been, =
but then the balance rail punchings have probably been crushed from when =
the piano was new,,,,,,,,,,  What's the clearance between the fallboard =
and the key?  That might give you a clue as to what's going on.
    On a hand made piano, like a Steinway, don't,,,,,,,,,,and I =
repeat,,,,,,,,don't EVER set everything to a set of specs before you at =
least look at the piano with all the hardware in place, and have a =
chance to at least set a few samples to the specs.  You can set a piano =
to the specs with the Japanese pianos, usually. I wouldn't count on it =
anywhere else.
Hope this helps, if not, I'll be here tomorrow.

Kevin.
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Bob Hull=20
  To: pianotech@ptg.org=20
  Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 9:14 PM
  Subject: regulation extremes?




  List,=20

  What would you say are the measurement parameters within which you =
should stay when adjusting hammer blow distance to acheive correct =
aftertouch?  Also, what key dip amounts would be too extreme both too =
little and too much?

  Here is the specific situation I am working on:

  I am regulating a Steinway M.  The beginning condition of the =
regulation was:

  1.  the key dip was inconsistent, some keys were 3/8 and many were a =
little more, but less than .390;

   2. Hammer line quite uneven; overall seemed to lack power.

   3. Most of the hammers have drop at 3 - 4 mm. or so; 4. let-off was =
varied.  Wear on this 20 year old piano is very minimal. =20

  So, as prescribed in the Steinway manual, I set key dip (on samples) =
to .390 (the manual says .390 to .410 can be used;  I set h. blow dist. =
to 1 3/4.  Set let-off to about 3/32. Then, aftertouch seemed to be too =
much - .080 or .090 punchings added and still had let-off.  I decreased =
drop to 1/16 or 2 mm. Still, aftertouch too much, seems to me.  (More =
than .070)  I checked rep. lever ht. and jack position on these.

  To try to decrease the aftertouch I lowered the sample hammers to 1 =
13/16 distance and even more, still - aftertouch too much!  Am I missing =
something?  A fine pianist is coming to do a program on this instrument =
soon and I want it to be "right".=20

  How much can the blow distance be increased until it is beyond the =
parameters of the intended design and creating other problems? =
Particularly for this piano.  And, was that 3/8 dip too little?  Why was =
it that way to begin with?  I'm pretty sure no one else has changed it =
since the piano was purchased.  Was the origianal dip maybe greater in a =
low-humidity situation in a New York winter when it was originally =
regulated?  Last weeks posts on aftertouch were appreciated.

  Thanks.

  Bob





-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----
  Do you Yahoo!?
  Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/4d/ee/9b/2e/attachment.htm

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