[pianotech] Action Ratios

David Love davidlovepianos at comcast.net
Thu Jan 7 08:57:46 MST 2010


I know you didn't change the blow distance but the fact that you chose 1.5
mm of aftertouch and Nick chose 2.6 mm suggests that the AT component in the
equation is not really relevant, it's just a number entered and then
deducted from the blow distance.  What does it actually mean in terms of how
the action regulates?  Since the equation is blow - let-off/dip-AT then
there should be some agreement on the AT otherwise you can just move the
numbers around at will to make things work but they may or may not have
application in the real world.  

 

David Love

www.davidlovepianos.com

 

From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf
Of Jude Reveley (Absolute Piano)
Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 5:51 AM
To: pianotech at ptg.org
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Action Ratios

 

The numbers are neither arbitrary nor selected just to make a data sheet
work. If you were to design an action from scratch, you have to start
somewhere and  design regulation specs that seem arbitrary from the outside,
turn out to be interdependent. If the piano is already built, one would
build the action from the top down; that is, certain criteria are already
inferred such as entrance height, casepart dimensions, string heights and
strike ratios that will ultimately determine the key height, stack location,
certain lever arm dimensions, bore distance etc. The final determinations
would be key proportion and rail heights. This makes what we encounter when
we're restoring an existing action quite counterintuitive, where we're given
a start and an end, but have to make sense of the middle and still conform
to normal regulation specification ranges.

 

If you look closer at my example, I didn't change the blow distance at all
and it remains at 46mm. I used the full overall travel of the hammer along
its arc relative to the keydip without interference from let-off or the
string. If anything, aftertouch is the most flexible if you acknowledge that
is ultimately the by-product of the entire action design set-up. Also
defining aftertouch as the moment the tender hits the jack is different than
defining it as the bump you feel in the key, which explains the difference
between 2.6mm and 1.5mm versus say 1mm. To try to force an action to have
46mm blow and 1mm aftertouch when you already have defined specs for string
heights, lever arms, stack location, key proportions, take your pick, just
won't work.

 

Gotta go tuning but I hope I clarified more than confused. Good luck.

 

Best,

 

 

Jude Reveley, RPT
Absolute Piano Restoration, LLC
www.absolute-piano.com

 

 

----- Original Message ----- 

From: David Love <mailto:davidlovepianos at comcast.net>  

To: pianotech at ptg.org 

Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 12:05 AM

Subject: Re: [pianotech] Action Ratios


 

OK, I get it but what bothers me is that the "choice" of defining the
aftertouch is just that, a choice in order to make the numbers work.  It's
a bit too loosely defined to my liking.  With Nick's side of the equation 44
mm makes sense because, in fact, 46 mm blow - 2 mm let-off is about how we
set it.  But where does 2.6 mm aftertouch come from.  It appears as if it's
an arbitrary number that must be assigned to an overall key travel of 10.5
mm in order to make the w/s ratio conform to the effort/resistance ratio.
Similarly on yours, the 1.5 mm makes more sense, I suppose (though it's
really more like .75 mm in practice if we use the blow, let-off numbers as a
reality check) but then your blow distance is artificial in that it must
deviate from the actual blow distance in order to make your w/s ratio
conform to the effort resistance ratio.  So what does the w/s then really
tell us?  That we can play with the numbers to make things work but it
doesn't apparently have any real world application.  It's arbitrary.   So
the question still stands as far as I'm concerned.  Suppose we want 10 mm
dip, 46 blow distance where do we set the effort/resistance ratio and who
can we calculate that (if we can)?  Or do we resign ourselves to "experience
has shown."

 

David Love

www.davidlovepianos.com

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech.php/attachments/20100107/a87ee194/attachment.htm>


More information about the pianotech mailing list

This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC