<DIV>
<P align=left><FONT size=3>Richard,</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT size=3><STRONG>"The hammers with less friction will spend a slightly less amount <BR>of time on the string. The more tightly pinned ones will stay on a <EM><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff40">microsecond </FONT></EM>longer dampening out the highest partials."</STRONG><BR></FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT size=3>O.k. you nailed me on this one : ) I have to admit I didn't intend my "microsecond" in any sort of scientific way. What I should have said is "The more tightly pinned ones will stay on the string a <FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff80"><STRONG><EM>tiny fraction of a second longer. <FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff">Thanks for calling me on my sloppy semantics! : )</FONT></EM></STRONG></FONT></FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT size=3>And no, this is not based on any scientific measurements but on my own intellectual model of what's happening. Obviously a hammer that has 1/4 swing will stay on the string longer than one that swings 20 times. Agreed?</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT size=3>Lastly, we all have seen hammers that swing 4-7 times that have excessive side play. So we should not be dependant on swings to gauge bushing firmness. sliding a staight edge back and forth under the shanks quickly shows the flanges with excessive side play. </FONT></P></DIV><BR><BR>Ryan Sowers, RPT Puget Sound Chapter<br>Pianova Piano Service<br>Olympia, WA<p>
                <hr size=1>Do you Yahoo!?<br>
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! <a
href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=26640/*http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush">Enter now</a>.