This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment Dave S. and List=20 I line up the back (or tail) of the hammer covering to the nose of the adjacent hammer when regulating check position in an upright. That=92s = about the point when dampers should start to move. If they move before that, = then the playing weight will be sensibly increased. With grand regulation =96 the hammer comes to within =BD=94 of the = string before the damper starts to rise. After damper regulation always check for = string follow through. Nein? Regards Michael G.(UK) =20 _____ =20 From: Piannaman@aol.com [mailto:Piannaman@aol.com]=20 Sent: 22 September 2005 04:46 To: pianotech@ptg.org Subject: Interesting damper regulation difference =20 List, =20 My last two jobs of the day were on nice, new German-built uprights. = One is a Seiler 122, the other is a Wilh. Steinberg(probably 132 centimeters = tall). Both are really nicely built upright pianos, with very well regulated Renner-built actions. =20 I found the touch on the Seiler to be on the heavy side, and not as controllable as I'd like. The cause was from the spoons contacting the damper levers very shortly after the beginning of the keystroke. =20 At the other end of the spectrum was the Steinberg. The hammers were a = full 2/3 of the way to the string before the dampers began to lift. The = action felt much lighter and far easier to control to me. And legato playing = was no problem. =20 I thought the philosophical differences in regulation might be of = interest. =20 Thanks for reading, =20 Dave Stahl ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/1a/47/7a/f6/attachment.htm ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC