<html> <head> <style> .hmmessage P { margin:0px; padding:0px } body.hmmessage { FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma } </style> </head> <body class='hmmessage'> Ed,   sounds reasonable to split aftertouch between blow and dip. Perhaps I should review my opinion about key dip as a constant. But an action is a system where everything depends on everything, so we need at least one constant, a fix point to start from. I was told that this starting point should allways be the keyboard with height and dip. If I got you right you do exactly that, too. But you re-regulate dip if aftertouch is uneven.   I allways thought that no pianoplayer would notice a small difference in let-off. That´s the reason why I use let-off to alter aftertouch (without giving up my constant fix point key dip). But perhaps I am wrong in that point. And what is valid for the let-off should be valid for the dip too: small differences are not noticed.   What I don´t understand: how do you change blow for a single key without altering the blow of the neighbour key? And does that not result in an unequal hammer line which looks not so fine? I know the trick to make an even hammer line by pressing the rest rail felt with a hot steel.   Gregor > From: A440A@aol.com > Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:06:51 -0500 > Subject: Re: basic regulating question > To: pianotech@ptg.org > > Gregor writes: > > >I never regulate aftertouch but first > > > at all key height and key dip. For me, key dip is not negotiable in > > > the meaning of having a window of 9.5 to 10.5 mm but of course for > > > *all* keys the same. At least for the white keys. I accept small > > > differences for the black keys. > > Why do you accept small differences in some of the keys? > > >For me, aftertouch is not a measure to regulate but the result of all > > > the other regulating steps. If aftertouch is uneven, I correct it > > > with slight adjustments of let-off, but never of white key dip > > > (that is what I mean by *not negotiable*). >> > > I have found that artists a FAR more sensitive to let-off > irregularites than they are slight changes in keydip. If I had to alter anything to > make the after-touch even while keeping the same key-dip, it would be the blow! > But I submit that keydip is less important than aftertouch. > At the very top of the line regulation, I alter keydip AND blow so that > aftertouch is identical. When doing this, I first set the keydip to a static > value and make sure all keys are equal. If, with an consistant blow, I have > unequal aftertouch, I will move the keydip as much as .010" and the blow as > much as .060" from the predetermined specs. The effect of splitting the > difference like this,(between the dip and blow) is to make all the irregularities > fall below the threshold of even the most sensitive pianists. > I have never seen any pianist notice .010" difference in keydip if the > aftertouch was even, but I have been called back for having less than 1/16" > difference between let-offs, (Ronnie Milsap is able to tell instantly if the > let-off is not exactly even, but he never noticed the slight difference in dip.) > Regards, > > > > Ed Foote RPT > http://www.uk-piano.org/edfoote/index.html > www.uk-piano.org/edfoote/well_tempered_piano.html > ************** The year's hottest artists on the red carpet > at the Grammy Awards. Go to AOL Music. > (http://music.aol.com/grammys?NCID=aolcmp00300000002565)</HTML> <hr />Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! <a href='http://clk.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/' target='_new'>MSN Messenger</a></body> </html>