[pianotech] Retrofitting a Steinway w/adjustable back action

[Delwin D Fandrich]

It's a pretty good system, I think, if the back end of the keys, etc., is
designed for the system from the beginning. It's just that, with the original
S&S key configuration and damper stack cavity, I found it difficult to get
everything aligned "correctly." 

Bearing in mind that the last time I did this was probably 25 years ago. Pre CAD
and pre a lot of knowledge and experience.

ddf 

| -----Original Message-----
| From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org 
| [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Ron Nossaman
| Sent: June 29, 2009 7:50 PM
| To: pianotech at ptg.org
| Subject: Re: [pianotech] Retrofitting a Steinway w/adjustable 
| back action
| 
| Delwin D Fandrich wrote:
| > | How does this work, geometrically? I'd really appreciate other 
| > | options, as they fit with physical reality. Please give.
| > | Ron N
| > 
| > It doesn't.
| 
| 
| So... Then what might be the point of spoons on damper under 
| levers? As a manufacturing expedient, in a piano designed for 
| them, I can see where it gives a quick final touch up of key 
| damper lift timing without disturbing alignment or pedal lift 
| timing. That could be a potentially good thing (depending on 
| how sloppy the rest of the regulation process was), but is 
| that important enough to anyone to go to the trouble of 
| making them fit in the available space in a retrofit? It 
| seems to be a tad wide of my priorities, but do any of you 
| out there find a tenth of a millimeter or less difference in 
| key damper lift timing worth spending time and angst on? If 
| so, why? I understand the pedal thing, so please don't go 
| into lengthly explanations on the question I didn't ask. I'm 
| asking about key lift.
| 
| I know I probably don't really want to hear the answers, but 
| the last several weeks of list traffic has numbed any 
| illusion of survival instincts and judgment I might have 
| otherwise entertained. So please, anyone, enlighten me.
| 
| Ron N
|