At 03:37 PM 12/18/2006, David wrote: >The pianist would have to work harder to restrain a "fly away" >action. To control the moment of hammer / string contact, the low >friction unit would have to decelerate more than the tightly pinned one. > >How's that for unclear? Unclear as mud. <grin> But I take your meaning about soft playing. Too free does make soft playing harder. I think that if you try firmer pinning on an action with very loose (but not wobbling side to side) hammers, you will find that the "flyaway action" tends to -- fly away, including flying out of the back check's embrace. It's true that the springs will be stronger when the hammer centers are tighter for the same lift speed, but this really is a benefit, because it speeds up the jack as well. And if one wishes to set the springs as strong as they can be without the pianist being bothered by the kick in the key, perhaps they can be stronger if the pinning is firm without as bad a sensation in the key, because the hammer is less fluttery at the top of the lift. Just a more velvety feeling when playing, less of a rattletrap feeling, and perhaps less double-striking when regulated very closely. I tell you what, David ... next time you have a good quality piano which is offending in the checking department, pin a few of the worst hammers to three swings and observe what happens. Then maybe you can explain it to me. I just know that if I do it, I like the results. Oh, and while you're at it, you might check the wippen flange and the balancier pinning as well, and fix them if they're very loose. But I've found that the hammer flange is the main problem, giving more immediate results than the other two. Best, Susan P.S. Did Wim also check to make sure that the jack has at least a little leeway in the balancier window at the end of the stroke? I don't know if this was mentioned - probably was.
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC