<HTML>In a message dated 10/24/02 9:37:18 PM Central Daylight Time, Tvak@aol.com writes: <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">As I mentioned, he must have been in a hurry.  I really used the word "lazy" kind of tongue in cheek.  He was "apparently" lazy; barring that, I wonder what reason there could be?  I mean, really, the underlying reason I sent this post was to possibly learn of a reason why lost motion might return (in spades!) to the treble and bass sections of a piano and not to the middle.  I've only been in the business 5 or 6 years.  There's alot I don't know.  I half-expected someone to write, "Check the Knooten Valve on that there pianer: it might be jammed into the Blathoflange and that'll cause lost motion on the ends of the keyboard every time!" </BLOCKQUOTE> Actually, swelling and shrinking of the keybed sometimes does cause lost motion to come and go and yes, it can be more in the middle and less on the ends.  But I really think you were right in your observation in this case.  I used to really be appalled at the condition I would find pianos to be in which had been "taken care of" for many years by someone who was well known when I first started in this area. Many of these people would scoff at the idea that anyone would ever do anything but tune a spinet.  It's the old, "I only do (Steinway) grands" blowhard posture.  The truth is that these people had so little experience doing such a thing as adjusting capstans that it was a difficult task for them and so they never did it, not under any circumstances.  I suspect that your "lazy RPT" falls into this category. Just because he's an RPT doesn't mean that he knows how to do this job well or efficiently.  All he had to do to pass the Technical Exam was adjust *one* (on the vertical action model).  I made a place for myself in this area by bucking the trend and actually doing what I learned from PTG, books and training seminars.  Believe it or not, it raised eyebrows and prompted "unethical" accusations just to do that.  Many things like that laid the foundation for what became my set of knowledge and skills. The way to approach a job like this is to not stress out over the repetitive nature of the job.  You can see that they all need to be adjusted.  As you noted, they all needed a couple of cranks.  The thing to do is get your head and body into a position where you can give them all a couple of cranks quickly and easily.  Then, after having gone through all of them, check them over and you'll probably have just one here or there which needs an additional crank or to back off because you've raised it above the rail. It also helps to have a good capstan wrench.  I got tired of the stamped out piece of sheet metal that was offered by the supply house.  Although I had to buy a whole set of them to get the one I wanted, I found a set of small, precision open end wrenches at a local hardware store.  The wrench finds and grips the screw much better than the one which looks like the toy wrench included with the Erector set I had when I was a kid. Finally, be sure that by taking up lost motion, you aren't making matters worse.  The rest rail may be set too close.  Where are the hammers checking?  When are the dampers lifting?  Is there very little aftertouch; are some of the hammers bobbling (false, repetitive striking)?  If raising the capstan makes all of the above conditions better, then it is the thing to do but if it causes the hammers to check too closely, the dampers to lift too soon and have too much aftertouch, it is not the right thing to do. I still suspect that in this case, it was the right thing to do.  You should look at an Acrosonic and see this:  acro$onic.  Sooner or later, you'll need to take the action out and tighten it up.  Just getting that colossal fallboard off and back on is a feat in itself.  This kind of work should not be done for free and it will be a challenge to explain why no one, *NO ONE* ever did it before or even suggested that it should be done. As for the "poor" scale design and calling them "JUNK" that some technicians routinely do to try to make you think how great they are, just brush that off and take your check for your day's work to the bank while they are sitting around waiting for a call to work on a piano that isn't beneath their dignity.  You can even tune one in the EBVT with the original bearing plan that has Bb3-F4 pure and it won't have the imbalances that Ed Foote says it will.  I have done this many times since he made his infamous proclamation. "Sideways Well":  the pit Ed Foote dug for himself to wallow in the day he knowingly published false data for the EBVT on Pianotech. Bill Bremmer RPT Madison, Wisconsin <A HREF="http://www.billbremmer.com/">Click here: -=w w w . b i l l b r e m m e r . c o m =-</A> </HTML>