At 10:53 pm -0700 7/8/06, Jurgen Goering wrote: >I believe the key balance point is an area that has often been >overlooked in regards action refinement... All this discussion of 1/2 punchings etc. would not be taking place if piano makers such as Steinway took the trouble to design the balance rail properly in the first place. My camera batteries have died, so the archive picture below is not as illustrative as I'd like -- I'll draw a diagram when I have more time -- but the rail here is made (in 1899 or another in 1860) in what I consider to be a proper fashion. The bevelling of the rail in front of the natural pins commences just at the front of the pin boring and so does the trough in front of the sharp pins. The pins are angled 4 or 5 degrees backwards -- another lost detail which Wolfenden was already regretting in many pianos in 1920. With such a design the balance point of the keys is properly determined and the front part of the washers and punchings simply folds round the angle exerting no pressure. By contrast a flat-topped rail, as on a 1923 Steinway 'O' I'm looking at at the moment, results in an indeterminate fulcrum for the sharp keys, which moves further forward as the key is depressed. At least the pins are angled. Congratulations to Frederick A. Vietor <http://tinyurl.com/goft9> who in 1931 provided Steinway with one more patent to print on their products and then drop for reasons of cost. JD -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20060808/307a3a3f/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: balance_rail.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 10267 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20060808/307a3a3f/attachment.jpg
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC