action ratios

[David Love]

It's also interesting to note that I've had wider variations than Terry's on
my standard 20+ note samples using only the weight method.  While there does
seem to be some problem in getting consistent results with three different
systems, I am inclined to believe that the problems lie more in the
measurement methods than in the any real difference in what weight versus
distance measurements should yield.  I admit, though, I am currently without
a good explanation.  Until then, I continue to not so much mix and match,
but cross check, if you prefer.

David Love

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Ballard" <yardbird@pop.vermontel.net>
To: "Pianotech" <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: November 03, 2002 6:36 PM
Subject: Re: action ratios



....Should be the same, but it hasn't actually confirmed yet. The
best trial we've got so far is Terry's 3-way measurement, and that
didn't look so good, graphed.

If I had to pick a word, I'd say the measurements are "parallel". But
the last time we talked about this, I suspected that a discrepancy
between these two derivations of action ratio (linear and weight)
remained to be dealt with.


This is why I echo David S's caution to avoid mix'n'matching these
measurements.

I can think of one test for the weight measurement which would
display the focus of its accuracy. As far an an angular reading, I
tried that yesterday afternoon on a Yamaha action model and came up
with action ratio of 3.99. I didn't get to try other readings on that
action model.


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

".......true more in general than specifically"
     ...........Lenny Bruce, spoofing a radio discussion of the Hebrew
roots of Calypso music
+++++++++++++++++++++
_______________________________________________
pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives