Action Geometry Consistency

[Farrell]

Bill wrote:

"....you need a better place to hide the error than blow, where they are amplified by the action ratio."

Well I don't know that amplified is the best term - an error accomodated by blow will always be about 5.5 times the size as that same error put into dip - but it is also likely to be noticed more in the dip. If not blow, where would you put the error? (Assuming of course we are not fixing the action.)

I would tend to either put it all into the blow, or like Ed Foote said, split it between blow and dip (keeping in mind that an even split here means the the amount of compensation in the dip will be 5.5 times less than that in the blow - or there abouts). I always try my best to have aftertouch and let-off as even as possible. 

Terry Farrell
  
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bill Ballard" <yardbird@vermontel.net>
To: "Pianotech" <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2003 7:34 AM
Subject: Re: Action Geometry Consistency


> At 12:28 AM -0500 5/14/03, Bradley M. Snook wrote:
> >What do I do to fix this problem?
> 
> If such deviations in the highly visible hammer line bother you, I'd 
> move it up from last place in the order of priorities. This problem 
> could be compared to getting 3ds, 4ths, 5ths and 6ths all to agree in 
> the temperament of a spinet piano.
> 
> Long ago I decided that, holding blow and LO steady meant I had to 
> choose between dip and aftertouch as the place to hide the error. Dip 
> was the obvious candidate.
> 
> That's not to say that these deviations shouldn't send you looking 
> for cock-eyed knuckles and capstans. But if you don't find them, you 
> ned a better place to hide the error than blow, where they are 
> amplified by the action ratio.
> 
> Bill Ballard RPT
> NH Chapter, P.T.G.
> 
> "I gotta go ta woik...."
>      ...........Ian Shoales, Duck's Breath Mystery Theater
> +++++++++++++++++++++
> _______________________________________________
> pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives