<HTML><HEAD> <META charset=US-ASCII http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; cha= rset=US-ASCII"> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1106" name=GENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #fffff= f"> <DIV> <DIV> <DIV>Avery asks:</DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue = 2px solid"><FONT face=Arial>Wasn't there recently a discussion about the "= new" way that Steinway is recommending <BR>pinning their actions. Very "loos= e" as compared to the traditional methods, as I <BR>remember</FONT></BLOCKQU= OTE>and Thump writes:</DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue = 2px solid"><FONT face=Arial>I'm with Sarah in<BR>that I think utterly slop= -free bushings with minimal<BR>friction would be ideal.</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><= /DIV> <DIV>Their (Steinway's) idea is exactly that. They are talking 2-4 gms or 1-= 3, depending upon with whom you talk and when. They say the difference is th= e Teflon impregnation, which allows low friction but a firm bushing. Many pi= anists seem to like the feel. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>There seem to be two arguments for a traditional 4-5 gram fit: truer gu= idance of the flight of the hammer (taken care of by a lower friction materi= al?), and higher friction to make the spring tighter, which in turn makes th= e jack return faster. Among my clientele I'm not seeing a clear preference.<= /DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Bob Davis</DIV></BODY></HTML>