This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment Remember of course that when we measure touch weights on a grand action, = the action is usually on the bench or otherwise separated from the = damper assembly (say, by putting the sustain pedal on). In effect you've = made the action feel as those the sustain pedal is on, even when it = isn't. True enough, but we're talking about real world playing. Measuring on = the bench doesn't give an accurate account of what the player actually = feels with the piano fully assembled. Just for clarification here, Mr. Bill was referring to measuring action = touch weight. Action touch weight implies action only - no dampers. So, = measuring action touchweight on the bench should yield the same results = as measuring touch weight in the piano. Now if one wishes to measure the = effect of damper lift on downweight and upweight, of course, that needs = to be done in the piano. That brings up a whole 'nuther question: what is the desired range(s) of = increase to touchweight that damper lift would induce? I don't know that = I've ever read anything about that. Terry Farrell ----- Original Message -----=20 On Jan 18, 2006, at 11:13 PM, Piannaman@aol.com wrote: I've read opinions about this where some techs say that changing = damper timing "doesn't really lighten the touch, it only gives that = perception." =20 Remember of course that when we measure touch weights on a grand = action, the action is usually on the bench or otherwise separated from = the damper assembly (say, by putting the sustain pedal on). In effect = you've made the action feel as those the sustain pedal is on, even when = it isn't. True enough, but we're talking about real world playing. Measuring on = the bench doesn't give an accurate account of what the player actually = feels with the piano fully assembled. =20 It's now alot easier to play staccato, but much harder to play = legato. The conventional damper timing regulation would favor neither of = these, balancing in the middle between the two of them. This is what I was initially worried about. I've heard that said = before, so I was cognizant of it going in. I was surprised to find out = that it really didn't seem to be the case. Nobody else who played it = noticed any difficulty in legato playing(or for that matter, greater = ease in playing staccato...). Believe me, if I'd noticed that it = altered the legato/staccato effects that much, I'd never have done it = the second time...:-[} =20 And like a said before, one of the best parts about this operation is = that it's easily reversible. Dave Stahl (Gumby....?) Mr. Bill ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/54/ae/1e/89/attachment.htm ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC