<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en"> <html> <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> David Love wrote: <blockquote TYPE=CITE><style></style> Well Richard, it sounds like you already paid David for the licensing.</blockquote> David, I would really appreciate leaving this kind of statement out of a discussion. I dont even want to consider what you mean by this, nor why you included it. Please ? <blockquote TYPE=CITE>Indeed one does not require any particularly low ratio levels to regulate quite normally... until one approaches the highest levels of the high SW zone</blockquote>  I took the liberty of re-including the rest of this statement as it is rather a decisive qualifier dont you think ? <blockquote TYPE=CITE>My point is that low ratios will not regulate normally.  If you happen to believe, as I do, that certain regulation parameters correlate to certain action ratios, then there is a narrow range of acceptable action ratios that you can use if regulation is a high priority.  With me, it is.  I think that an action should regulate with 10 mm dip and 45 - 48 mm blow.  There may be a few individuals who for some reason prefer the dip to be deeper.  Those individuals are exceptions (in my opinion) and should not form the basis of decisions made about how generally to set up an action.  My experience and testing suggests that the range for of action ratios that will allow you to achieve those regulation specs fall between 5.75 and 5.85.  I know many individuals are willing to take the ratio down to 5.5, or lower.  If they are set on 10 mm dip then they will have to compromise blow distance to do that.</blockquote> With that above qualifier in mind, I find that the range of dip available for 45 - 48 blow is considerably larger, also the amount of aftertouch variers and can figure into this. I also find that it is no problem regulating to 10 mm dip for a wider ratio range then you give. I also find that it is the norm rather then the exception that pianists tastes in these matters, as in virtually all others, vary.   <blockquote TYPE=CITE>So let's do the math.  Let's take note 18 in high strike weight zone.</blockquote> After re-inclusion of the qualifier to my above statement, I find this example out of the scope which I drew up. Indeed, I stated right out that when one reaches this highest level (and you picked the absolute highest) one runs into problems. We could just as easily do the same for the absolute lowest. Perhaps we should concentrate on what seems the jist of your discussion ? You state that velocity can compensate for mass, and I question this. You state that the range of dip is 10 mm to 10 mm :), blow, 45 - 48 mm, ratio 5.75 - 5.85, aftertouch (?), and I question this as well. You state that the SW zone should be limited to a range of low mediums to mid mediums, and that heavier then that leads exclusively to more loudness, which you define seemingly  as a negative quality, and all kinds of regulation problems. (based on the range of parameters you give above) You also claim that the lightest controlable pppp playing is accomplished with very light hammers, and I question these as well. Now what I get out of all this is that you define a very narrow set of regulation and action ratio parameters that you personally prefer and feel yeilds always the best sound, and you feel anything out of this range is... wrong. Is that correct ?     <blockquote TYPE=CITE>Whether you like the sound or not is a different matter entirely.... and falls within the realm of personal taste does it not ? I find it odd that "taste" or "feel" is so often dismissed in these discussions as irrelevant.</blockquote> David.... that is exactly my point. Pianists tastes for touch and sound vary largely. Gotta go to work now, but I would end this one by saying that the specs argument (which perhaps at least half of this this boils down to)  has gone on for ages and will not be solved here. Manufacturers give recommended specs, and they are not written in iron. Bob Hofs article series on action elevations shows clearly the dependancy these have on the distance between string heights and key bed. And thats just the start of it. No... in this I agree entirely with our friend from Texas whose opinions on tuning and ETD related subject matter I enjoy so much and often disagree with. Its not a perfect world.   -- Richard Brekne RPT, N.P.T.F. UiB, Bergen, Norway <A HREF="mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no">mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no</A> <A HREF="http://home.broadpark.no/~rbrekne/ricmain.html">http://home.broadpark.no/~rbrekne/ricmain.html</A>   </body> </html>