Lotta wisdom here Mr.Ron. We can learn alot from being microscopic and twisting about the numbers. I do, I have, I am but.... <div>We can also learn much from Bill Spulocks statement to me some years ago now....He said "Just do good basic piano work and people will be happy" Quite true on most days.</div> <div>No where did I put that learning curve? <div style="color: navy; font-family: 'Comic Sans MS', sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; clear: both; ">Dale Erwin R.P.T. Erwin's Piano Restoration Inc. Mason & Hamlin/Steinway/U.S. pianos www.Erwinspiano.com Phone: 209-577-8397 <tt><tt>     </tt></tt> </div> <div style="color: black; font-family: arial, helvetica; font-size: 10pt; ">-----Original Message----- From: Ron Nossaman <rnossaman@cox.net> To: pianotech <pianotech@ptg.org> Sent: Sun, Aug 26, 2012 9:03 pm Subject: Re: [pianotech] action ratio <div id="AOLMsgPart_0_14cd93d2-f865-413e-8860-a76262d98eab" style="margin: 0px;font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, Sans-Serif;font-size: 12px;color: #000;background-color: #fff;"> <pre style="font-size: 9pt;"><tt>On 8/26/2012 10:18 PM, David Love wrote: > And your point is suggestive of the fact that > the bit of key travel is not really the critical factor. Rather, it is > jack clearance from some yet unknown starting point. So aftertouch for > the sake of that formula may be something other than what we think of as > it relates to the thickness of the cardboard placed underneath the key. > That’s the main point of the question. I've watched these debates go by for a long time, and participated in a few here and there, but the year the convention was in Arlington, I tried something a little different. The piano was a Kimball, if I recall correctly, and it got nothing special in exotic action balancing, just parts selection and hammer tapering to meet weight ranges. I roughed in a couple of regulation passes, with my squishy front punchings and whatever my aftertouch spacer was at the time. I did blow and letoff by measurement and eyeball to even up, and dip by block with my letoff spacer, etc, and drop by feel. Then I made a pass changing the dip a couple of thousandths here and there strictly by feel with no block or spacer until I got it as even as I could. Then, a final pass tweaking letoff, also strictly by feel which made more improvement than I would have thought possible at that point. I had some people over to play it in the next week or so before it went home, and everyone remarked how even it felt, and the pianissimo control. One guy said he hadn't played this particular piece in years because he didn't have a piano with the pianissimo control necessary to do it. That felt particularly nice to hear. At the convention some weeks later, I had lunch with Ed Foot at a local restaurant of a class level befitting our station in life, and told him the story. I actually feared for his blood pressure for a second there. He was horrified that I'd adjusted letoff as a final tweak. Well, yea, so was I, but I did it anyway and the folks who played the piano without hearing the story loved it. So the moral is, I guess, that there isn't one, and the "right" way is the way that works for who needs it to work, and the "wrong" way, however right, for everyone else, has to not offend the person or people who count in that situation. Both methods could well be anywhere from identical, to wildly divergent,and qualify as right or wrong - depending. So it ain't "whatchagonnado", it's "who'sitgonnaplease"? But you don't get to know that exactly until later. The other moral is that there likely are no truly sacred parameters in anything. There is more education in questioning the accepted than in accepting the questionable --- Ron N --- </tt></pre> </div>  </div> </div>