Hi James, thanks for the correction on terms. I find it difficult often to keep track of which language one needs to speak when ofte times. Here I generally use <<compliance>> in the sense of something doing what it is asked to do... i.e. to comply. Tho I am aware that some out there are used to using terms like these from a physicis perspective, many are not and more easily relate to whats being said. The former generally have no trouble figuring out whats being said either way. Take your example below. Your compliant (flexible) key will affect the action as a whole in the opposite sense. In my own post I tied a lack of action compliance to a sensation of power loss, which essentially is the same as you draw up below when you isolate the key as the <<guilty>> part as it were. I suppose I should have qualified my usage of terms... but postings get long enough as it is :) Cheers RicB James Ellis wrote: >Richard, I think there might be some confusion of terms on the technician's >part too. In mechanical terms, "compliance" is the opposite of >"resistance", so I don't see how an action's being too compliant could >result in a complaint of its being too stiff or heavy. The complaint would >likely be that it's too loose or too light. A limber (flexible) key is >something else. That will make the front of the key more compliant to the >pianist's finger, but not the action, and he/she is likely to complain of a >loss of power, or of not being able to "connect" with the piano. The >pianist's finger will be doing "work", but some of that "work" will just be >flexing the key instead of throwing the hammer toward the string. > >Sincerely, Jim Ellis > >_______________________________________________ >caut list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives > > >
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC