Dummy Damper/Keith

[Joseph Garrett]

Keith,
I agree with your premise. If the action is properly designed and
manufactured, there is no need for the "dummy damper". However, I think you
are missing a point. That is, in manufacturing a piano, there are so many
places that a mistake can happen, in the sequence of making the piano, that
there becomes the need for "wiggle room", so to speak. An example that is
pertinent to this: If the action mounting bolts were set a little too far
towards the front of the piano, this would make it a necessity for the
action to be slightly tipped towards the back of the piano. This would put
the damper lift rod out of it's axis, so to speak. Which in turn would allow
the rod to swing towards the back of the piano, thus slightly engaging the
damper levers. This is so simple of a mistake in action set-up. Yet, it
happens all the time. The Assembly line is not going to come to a screeching
halt, just so the action bolts can be repositioned! That's a fact, that I
have seen, many times. Therefore, the "designer" is forced to have the
"dummy damper" as part of the system. This is dictated by the "bean
counters"/"efficiency expert types", that have more say-so in the actual
production of said piano. That, unfortunately, is the real life of
manufacturing!
I agree, in a perfect world, the "dummy damper" should not be needed, IF the
action is correctly engineered. If you want some real insight as to the
difference between what the Designer specified and what really happens on
the assembly line, talk to Del, some time, with appropriate Micro Brews to
go with.<G> You will truly have your eyes opened to how difficult it is to
get "Production" to make it as designed!
Best Regards,
Joe Garrett, RPT, (Oregon)
Captain, Tool Police
Squares Are I

----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith McGavern" <kam544@gbronline.com>
To: "Pianotech" <pianotech@ptg.org>
Cc: "Joseph Garrett" <joegarrett@earthlink.net>
Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 7:40 AM
Subject: Re: Dummy Damper/Keith


> At 9:37 PM -0800 11/29/03, Joseph Garrett wrote:
> >... why have I seen "dummy dampers" on pianos that were manufactured
before
> >spinet pianos and split rods were invented?????????<G>
> >Answer: it was a way of assuring that any foible/manifestation/screw-up,
> >etc., would not be a problem, in regards to the factory set-up of
dampers!
>
> Good Morning, Joe,
>
> As I understand the answer to your own question, you're saying that
> the level of competence in the piano action manufacturing industry
> might have been sub-standard at times, thereby causing someone with
> some intelligence to cover their bases by having these type levers
> installed in every action. Yes/No?
>
> If so, this is the second reference in this thread you have made
> concerning the lack of understanding concerning piano action
> manufacturer's capabilities. The first being,
> "The points you make are valid, EXCEPT, you are assuming, (there's that
> stupid word again.), that actions are correctly designed, which most are
> not. " Sat, 29 Nov 2003 20:29:18 -0800
>
> Now *if* this were the case in some of yester-year's pianos *as you
> are stating*,  that could easily result in the prevailing theory in
> several persons' minds of the lever's primary purpose. And, if in
> fact, this did occur for the reasons *you have stated*, then
> certainly its primary purpose would have been that, but only to cover
> up potential discrepancies. Such conditions fall outside the scope of
> what I am saying.
>
> I maintain, "In a properly designed and adjusted damper system, there
> is no need for a auxiliary damper to be installed to keep a single
> lift rod away from the damper levers. None whatsoever." And I will
> add, "regardless of what year it was manufactured."
>
> There is no fudge room here in my position. It is what it is.
>
> Keith
>
> Keith McGavern
> Registered Piano Technician
> Oklahoma Chapter 731
> Piano Technicians Guild
> USA