[pianotech] nomenclature

[Ed Foote]

Greetings, 
    Just for the record,  I like "whippen".   It is how I learned it, from a British teacher.  What I am expected to do with it, and the quality of that work,  is connected to the teacher that taught me what it was. Using his nomenclature helps maintain that connection.  Same goes for the balancier and grub. They are peculiar words that are only used by the small fraternity we live in.  The rest of the world thinks us esoteric, not only for the mysterious, raucous way we create harmony, but the arcane arts we seem to possess when taking that hugely complicated thing out of their piano and using strange tools to make a changes that are poorly understood to any others.  
       This is totally reactionary, of course, but not matter.  I haven't yet found the tech that doesn't know what is being talked about when piano terms are used.   


>>Fifteen or more years ago, the Journal published an article about why 'wippen' is the correct spelling of that part, and not "whippen," but the latter persists.  And, though I don't like it either, so will other doohickeythingamabobwidgets. 

Ed Foote RPT

http://www.piano-tuners.org/edfoote/index.html

 



While it's still a long way from comprehensive, there is a standard reference in this country that would eliminate most of the characteristic recursive guesswork when someone asks a question making up parts names as they go along. For $20 and shipping, "Piano Parts and Their Functions" would often save considerably more than that in cumulative time spent just trying to understand the description. 

 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20111115/bfe139e0/attachment.htm>