Steinway regulation

[BobDavis88@AOL.COM]

Newton writes:
> What Bob Davis wrote is quite correct and holds true to any action, it is
>  the "feel" that is more important than the specifications.  An exact number
>  is far less important than consistency.

Newton,
No disagreement. As I said,
> Therefore, the regulation >  has to be done by function rather than 
specifications. 

Your discussion of regulation is admittedly more thorough than mine, which 
was not intended to be exhaustive. I made an interpretation (possibly 
incorrect) from Pam's note that she knew regulating procedure and was looking 
for "numbers," while waiting for her manual, and my intention was merely to 
point out the balancing act. Thanks for spending the extra time. 

I would also point out that samples should be at several points in the scale, 
as the action won't necessarily regulate the same from end to end, because of 
differences in leverage. This is particularly true of Steinways, but even 
shows up on other makes. I regulated a Yamaha C7 recently which required 
about 3mm difference in blow end-to-end.

This brings up an interesting question anyway, whether to insist on uniform 
DIP or uniform AFTERTOUCH. In a perfect world, you can have both if you are 
careful; a technician from a "major manufacturer" told me that if you set a 
straight hammerline, the letoff correctly, and the dip with a block, the 
aftertouch "would come out right," but I have not found this to be true, 
because of slight differences in knuckle shape and placement, leverage, and 
so forth. I would say that of pianists who expressed a preference, I have had 
more prefer uniform aftertouch to uniform dip, so I lean that way unless they 
express an opposite preference. How about the rest of you?

Bob Davis