<html> <body> Andre - Your analysis is interesting, but I'm not sure without flaw, though it may be that I'm not understanding you entirely. Before anything else, it should be understood that, within the realm of mechanical rationality and effectiveness,  there is a range of what is acceptable, or preferred, by pianists, whether professional or otherwise.  Second, I would prefer to sidestep the issue of tonal effect, for the time being, as any experiment to evaluate such claims should be as controlled as possible, and also, I still haven't read the article.  What remains then are the issues of precision, tactile response, and consistency.  I have no doubt, both logically and from my own experience with these punchings, that establishing a consistent key dip is easier than with softer, woven punchings.  The sense of termination is more defined.  There is a minimum amount of perceived compression at the end of the keystroke.  I would assume that,  certainly in the earlier stages, these punchings would deform less than the woven variety, in general, though I've seen examples of the latter that I thought to be too hard to use.  I suspect that the long term deformation issue is, as you suggest, not a real concern, for the reasons you indicate. So, what about this question of soft or hard landings?  Frankly, I question your analysis of aftertouch.  Aftertouch does not mean "after the work has been done".  Even apart from tactile expectations of the pianist, or the need for a "real-world" safety margin, there is a degree of jack movement, past where the hammer drops, that is necessary for the action to function properly.  In response to your comments, I performed an experiment which I found revealing. While not necessary for the experiment, I measured up and down weight of a sample note and calculated friction, which, in this case happened to be 6 grams (not my usual). I then determined the gram weight required to just move the jack through escapement from a static key, positioned at jack / let off button contact.  This happened to be 120 grams. Using a very firm light green punching (I ran out of Wurzen's) I built up the front punching height until I found the point where the difference between the key moving through escapement or not was one white punching (.08mm / .0035"). From that point, I removed paper punchings until I achieved what, to me, felt like the traditional 'American'(?) amount of aftertouch. I measured the extracted paper punchings and got: .76mm / .030".  This also seemed very close to what was necessary to allow the jack to stand clear of the descending knuckle.  With less aftertouch, the knuckle would have to work to push back the jack (against a spring) on its way to check the hammer, losing some momentum in the process.  On a soft blow, this could make the difference between a captured hammer and one which bounces back. I suppose you could make a case for the idea of trading aftertouch for power. Assuming a given key dip, the less taken up by aftertouch, the more travel/time is available to drive the hammer from further away or to closer to the string.  On the other hand, since, to reduce aftertouch you have to either increase blow or decrease key dip, such a revised dip dimension might feel considerably disconcerting to the pianist. Which takes you to the physiological component...what the pianist feels and what he/she expects to feel.  Would you suppose there is such a thing as "finger-followthru", similar to follow through in most athletic motions?  Maybe sometimes, the tactile feel is more critical than speed or power. Maybe, as with voicing, the repertoire acts as a determinant. <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">If someone prefers a more, as you say, "cushioned stop", then that person should allow for some more after touch. The surplus of after touch is actually a waste of energy and a waste of time. The more waste, the more that feeling of "cushioned stop". Capisce?</blockquote> You seem to indicate a clear bias in favor of the firm landing over a softer one, and this, based upon the power-inefficiency inherent in the softer one.  Nevertheless, if the pianist prefers the softer feel, would you expect to find a difference whether that sensation is achieved by modulating the punching density as opposed to increasing aftertouch? Perhaps someone could clarify the difference in what David Stanwood refers to as "pressed "felt, and your description of the Wurzen.  As I understand it, pressure is part of the felting process. I really must read your article. Maybe you and Stanwood could meet, maybe the Hauge, and work this out. Regards - David Skolnik At 08:30 PM 5/7/2005 +0200, you wrote: <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">On 7-mei-05, at 19:34, David Love wrote: <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Why would more aftertouch cre= ate a more cushioned stop?  I do have some customers who prefer a very soft feel at the bottom of the stroke in spite of the fact that it creates greater difficulty in regulating the dip as a very delicate touch is required to determine just exactly where the "bottom" of the stroke is.  Nevertheless, for a variety of reasons: arthritis to personal preference, there have been times when customers have preferred a much thicker woven punching to a thinner and firmer one.  I don't think greater aftertouch would have accomplished the same thing.  David Love davidlovepianos@comcast.net </blockquote> With all due respect David.... As I said before : more aftertouch is a waste of energy and time. Why? Because aftertouch is a movement AFTER all 'the work' has been done. What is 'the work'? It is the mechanical work an action has to perform in order to cause a piano hammer to go up, hit the string(s) and come to a rest in the back check. meanwhile, we hope that the jack did escape from under the knuckle without causing any trouble for the work the hammer had to do. If all that has been accomplished, 'the work' has been done. Aftertouch comes after the work. It literally means that you do some work for nothing. Why would one do want to do something for nothing? Because it is safer to have at least a tiny surplus of movement because many actions have problems more or less. Problems 'more or less' can be caused by a multitude of reasons, which most often can be combined in three conceptions : worn parts, bad regulation, friction. If this "work for nothing" is incorporated in 'the work', the mechanical way, it always causes a more or less softer touch, caused by loss of energy, caused by : worn parts, bad regulation, friction. Actually, aftertouch is bad regulation, because it is a loss of energy, and thus time. But it is necessary, because an action regulated too sharply, is highly dependent on the newness of the action parts, the regulation of the action, and friction within keyboard and action. Because most actions (generally speaking) are so so so regulated, always have friction, and usually are not new, a minor aftertouch is necessary to compensate for these. A very small aftertouch is called a 'hard landing'. It means that a very small part of the 'action', 'the works' is wasted. It also means that all the movements of keyboard and action combined are translated into the finger of the technician/pianist as working very directly, and thus very efficiently. Usually a hard landing is translated in an aftertouch of between 0 and 0,5 mm. Many pianists prefer this 'hard landing' because the action feels very precise, and that means that the pianist gets the impression of a fast and precise working action. In other words : the pianist feels that he/she plays on a very sharp and trustworthy piano. The technician though, has to re-regulate this instrument after every concert. A medium aftertouch is a little safer for the pianist and for the technician, because of the slightly bigger aftertouch. A medium aftertouch is typically 0,5 mm and is called 'medium landing' It means literally that after the mechanical work has been done (including bad regulation and friction) there is always that small surplus of mechanical 'safety', meaning that the jack has a little more space to come out from under the knuckle, so that the hammer will not bounce back on the jack. This extra movement, this waste, will however cause for a softer feeling. A big aftertouch is called a 'soft landing'. It only means even more mechanical 'surplus', mechanical 'waste' and is translated in an aftertouch of 1 mm or more. I can not imagine why any pianist wants a soft landing, but they are there. We have a saying : "customer is king". If the customer wants a soft landing, we'll let him/her have it (as long as they pay). A soft landing is the ultimate waste of mechanical energy and time. Why time? because the movement in the action is delayed. This delay causes the feeling of more softness. The more aftertouch, the more softness. You still don't believe it? Try it out for yourself. EAR friendly greetings from Andr� Oorebeek <a href="http://www.concertpianoservice.nl/" eudora="autourl"> www.concertpianoservice.nl</a> "Where music is no harm can be" </blockquote></x-html> </blockquote></body> </html>