All in a row

[Bill Ballard]

Ron and David (and whoever doesn't have any better idea of how to 
spend a Saturday night),

The argument laid out by Ludwig Riemann in Pfeiffer is tantalizing in 
all that it has to offer, the arrival of more consistent dip between 
naturals and sharp and the reduced and easier height of the sharps, 
both of which the pianists will thank us for. All we have to do is 
set all the balance pins in one line, that's all it costs us. 
Probably bringing the sharps' balance points away from the capstan 
would be a better arrangement than moving the naturals in towards the 
sharps' balance line. It would seem to avoid squashing the leverage 
into too small a space.

But even doing this relocation of the balance line (by moving the 
sharps), the consequences to the leverage of the key such as David 
has observed is difficult to ignore. David's metrology may seem to 
exist in a universe parallel to that of linear measurement of key 
lever ratios: in fact, it is simply measuring the leverage by weight. 
I like my keyboards at .51, and I have seen key lever ratios
  of .59. But I am not looking forward to meeting at keyboard with .79 
ratio, especially the group of .79's was in fact the sharps, and I 
was supposed to set aftertouch and not worry about dip, and 
furthermore, to expect to rebalance a set of keys whose leading had 
to answer to a 5.5 total leverage on the naturals and (way up there) 
7.5 on the sharps.

Certainly I'd love to play on one of Chwatal's keyboards for the 
freedom allowed once the height of the sharps was reduced. And I 
might even be able to play beyond the effects of the action ratio on 
the front weights and key dip. But then pianists can learn to love 
anything, as long as it sounds good. Who remembers the grands up in 
the Pacific Northwest with no front leads and the hammers ground down 
to bring the balance weight within playable range. There were many 
pianists who loved these pianos. I believe I remember Don Mannino 
reporting favorably on one on this list, a few years back.

But getting back to the "tomahtos" and "tomaytos" in Ron and David's 
remarks, Ron's challenge that David should refute each of Riemann's 
reported advantages is not required. I agree that what Riemann says 
in is fact there for the pianist to enjoy. The issue is a little 
larger, namely whether the side-effects of such a redesiging of the 
keyboard is a reasonable price to pay for it.

You say key height and I say inertia....let's call the whole thing off.

Mr. Bill Ballard RPT
NH Chapter, P.T.G.

"Can you check out this middle C?. It "whangs' - (or twangs?)
     Thanks so much, Ginger"
     ...........Service Request
+++++++++++++++++++++