1890s WNG Action Geometry

[Farrell]

I see the photo makes it look like the capstan is leaning forward a bit - that's just a photo angle artifact - the two moved shorter capstans are straight. I wish I could claim to be doing something revolutionary, but that definitely not the case.

Phil saw my post and questioned my capstan movement positions. I just remeasured the original and the two moves. He was right - the moves were not as large as stated. The first, larger, move was 11.5 mm forward and the second move was 8 mm.

I've got the action spread at 113 mm. Those capstan moves were the last thing we did last night and I have yet to accurately regulate things and see exactly what all the ramifications will be - but it seems like we are on the right track. My plan is to modify a few more notes and fully regulate things and get an accurate picture of what's going on. I will report back, as I'm sure we will be looking for a recommendation or two.

Thanks for your input.

Terry Farrell
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  Great experimemting and I like the Overs-like reverse angle capstan. Might fooling around with the spread give you some options on the geometry and touchweight? I've always been afraid to make such a tall heel although I've encountered some set-ups where something like that might have been called for. How does the note regulate as far as dip, hammer blow, jack in window clearance? I guess the proof will be in the pudding so keep us informed.

  Jude Reveley, RPT
  Absolute Piano Restoration, LLC
  Boston, Massachusetts
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20060718/5af020d6/attachment.html