<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII"> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.5730.11" name=GENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY id=role_body style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY: Arial" bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 topMargin=7 rightMargin=7><FONT id=role_document face=Arial color=#000000 size=2> <DIV> <DIV>   <STRONG><EM>Hi Daid</EM></STRONG></DIV> <DIV><STRONG><EM>  I have rebuilt  one of these.  You might check the archives as there was a thread on these last year. The limitations are not as bad when the string scale & tension sis assessed correctly. Mine was scaled for A-458.  Yup that's a half step higher. If I did it over  I'd rescale of course.</EM></STRONG></DIV> <DIV><STRONG><EM>  What type of modifications are you referring to specifically?</EM></STRONG></DIV> <DIV><STRONG><EM>  Dale</EM></STRONG></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid"><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>What are the tonal limitations of the upper treble of this type (no capo d'astro bar)?  How far could you / would you go to address these limitations?  This would probably best be addressed to those who are doing innovative installations.  Are there inherent limitations in this design that would limit the effectiveness of these modifications?<BR><BR>Were these keyboards originally heavily weighted?  I've seen one which starts with about 10 (ten) 7/16" leads in A<FONT size=1>0</FONT>. On first glance (un-disassembled) they look original.<BR><BR>Thanks <BR><BR>David Skolnik<BR></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV> <DIV></DIV> <DIV> </DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>