No subject

[Don_Mannino@yca.ccmail.compuserve.com]

     Vince wrote:

     >> . . . isn't it approaching negligibility?<<

     I haven't used David's method of measuring the ratios yet, but the
     change from 11mm to 9mm is enough (on the Steinway and Young Chang
     actions I have done it to) to require about 2mm extra hammer travel
     with no change in key dip.  In many pianos this works out very well,
     but it can cause problems in others.

     Perhaps this is not enough leverage change to fully compensate for the
     lost mass in the hammers. Lowering the overall mass of the system by
     removing mass at the hammers and in the keys does add up to easier
     fortissimo playing, which may compensate further by allowing the
     pianist to accelerate the hammers to a higher velocity.

     I prefer to build tone in this sort of bass-akwards way - if the
     hammers are heavy and soft, before working with the felt to build tone
     I evaluate whether the piano could benefit from lighter hammers, and
     look at the action - key stick ratio, knuckle / jack / spread line
     alignment, friction, etc., to see if I should change the knuckles or
     capstans.  After I'm satisfied with the action, then I'll weigh off
     the keyboard correctly and finally go to work on the hammers.

     Generally I've done this in a seat of the pants manner, and I did
     screw up a few actions in the past when my learning curve was a little
     more steep.  David Stanwood's approach promises to give a more exact
     procedure for making decisions on how to proceed with a particular
     piano, and I'm all for it.

     Don_Mannino@yca.ccmail.compuserve.com