<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=2 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="=
Times New Roman" LANG="0"><I>In a message dated 7/13/2002 9:22:56 AM Pacif=
ic Daylight Time, collin.s@skynet.be writes:<BR>
<BR>
</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2=
FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></I><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT=
: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"><BR>
<BR>
Thanks, Terry, for your patient reply.<BR>
<BR>
Stéphane Collin.<BR>
<BR>
----- Original Message ----- <BR>
From: "Farrell" <mfarrel2@tampabay.rr.com><BR>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org><BR>
Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2002 11:33 AM<BR>
Subject: Re: Lighter or Heavier ?<BR>
<BR>
Terry wrote <BR=
>
You have the potential to duplicate action touchweight characteristics accu=
rately and predictably by using Stanwood's methods/concepts. This is one of =
the benefits of employing Stanwood's ideas. I should think one could take tw=
o Bechstein's of the same model, do the component touchweight balancing in t=
he same way, correct whatever geometry needed correcting, and have two actio=
ns that are identical. <BR>
Stephanie,Terry</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" style="BACKGROUND-CO=
LOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOC=
KQUOTE><BR>
</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3=
FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BR>
</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3=
FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Times New Roman" LANG="0">>>>>>&g=
t;>>The Stanwood concepts are great no butts about it. However t=
he above statement is only completely true and workable if the funky k=
ey geometry is remedied otherwise despite the action parts chosen to defeat =
the wrong key leverage your limitations are still to much hammer weigh=
t and too much lead in keys. I'm working with a 1920 Baldwin 5 ft. 8 inch gr=
and that proves the point. Keys are full of lead in the bass with 4 leads st=
ill at note 40. Horribly heavy static touch weight ,70-80 grams<BR>
I moved the capstans 3/8 of an inch to try to overc=
ome the key leverage and match the only choice of shank and wippen for=
this odd beast available <BR>
and I still had to shoot for low hammer /strike weights. Note 4 needed no mo=
re than 8 grams ,note 16- 7.5 grams note 40-6.5 grms ,you get the idea=
. Even at this I'll only be able to remove 1 or possibly 2 leads in th=
e bass. (7-8 per key)<BR>
The true fix would be new keys and leverages to match the=
parts available which wasn't an option in this case. I tried.<BR>
It will work but I've never moved capstans that far. Wow!<BR>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Dale Erwin>>&g=
t;>>>>>>>>>>></FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000=
" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="=
Arial" LANG="0"><BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT=
: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">| </FONT><FONT COLOR="#00000=
0" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE=
="Arial" LANG="0"><BR>
| Terry Farrell<BR>
| <BR>
| ----- Original Message ----- <BR>
| From: "Stéphane Collin" <collin.s@skynet.be><BR>
| To: <pianotech@ptg.org><BR>
| Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 6:42 AM<BR>
| Subject: Re: Lighter or </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2=
FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Times New Roman" LANG="0"><I><BR>
</I></FONT></HTML>