>I like your idea of alternating two unison 'sets' for a demonstration that >could give a true and real-time comparison. At least both systems would be on the same soundboard and rim assembly. >The hammers could be a bit tricky. How would it be to get a set of Renner >Blues or some such high end hammer and just stick 'em on, no voicing >allowed. Let the cards fall where they may. Or maybe there's another >hammer that comes out of the box with more consistency? It seems to me that most any decent set of hammers is pretty consistent from hammer to hammer within the set already. Most of the major voicing I have done seems to be trying to blend sections together to overcome soundboard design and scaling problems. Touch up field voicing is on worn hammers, and I confess I normally don't spend time trying to level unisons when a hammer brushing and a couple of quick passes with light needling will make the pianist happy, so the symptoms I'm masking with voicing in these situations may not be a hammer problem at all. Since I've been building better designed boards, I find I have very little voicing to do when I take the time to properly level unisons. I think hammers right out of the box would be a fair comparison, with no attempt to even smooth the scale breaks. The strings should be carefully leveled and such, but the hammers shouldn't be modified. >I know I'd like to see it! The Wapin system may be a wonderful thing. I >just need to see more than a graph on a piece of paper to convince me. > >Brian Trout Me too, and me too. Ron N
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC