<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; =
charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2><EM>Dale Erwin wrote:</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2><EM></EM></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><EM>... For example many of the Stwy actions I (we)work on =
from
the glory years (The 20's) require no more than a minor knuckle =
movement
(16 to 16.5 mm) to accommodate a slightly heavier hammer and stay within =
the
normal regulation ranges ...</EM></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>The problem with Steinways is that the key ratio can =
vary
considerably, from .48 to .56. That makes the selection of knuckle =
placements more problematic and often requires a move of the capstan as
well. In general you can figure on a .4 change in the action ratio =
for
each 1 mm change in the knuckle. So it's very important to =
understand
the overall action ratio when making changes and then target a specific =
hammer
weight (strike weight) to match up with it. There are times when =
the
original setup .48 key ratio and 16 mm knuckle will be delivering a low =
enough
ratio to accommodate a 1/2 - 3/4 medium zone hammer (a typical new =
Steinway
hammer with taper). However, there will be a different friction =
component
with a knuckle at 16 mm than at 17mm and it is often worth considering =
moving
the capstan so that you can use a 17mm knuckle in order to keep friction =
lower. The magic line, of course, should also be =
considered. On
a Steinway I find I generally like to use key ratio .52 - =
.53 with
a 17 mm knuckle.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>David Love</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=Erwinspiano@aol.com
href="mailto:Erwinspiano@aol.com">Erwinspiano@aol.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=pianotech@ptg.org
href="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org">pianotech@ptg.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> November 03, 2002 12:29 =
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: action =
ratios</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT><BR></DIV><FONT =
face=arial,helvetica><FONT lang=0
face="Times New Roman" size=2 FAMILY="SERIF">In a message dated =
11/3/2002
11:32:27 AM Pacific Standard Time, <A
=
href="mailto:davidlovepianos@earthlink.net">davidlovepianos@earthlink.n=
et</A>
writes:<BR><BR></FONT><FONT lang=0 style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: =
#ffffff"
face=Arial color=#000000 size=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF"><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px =
solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"
TYPE="CITE"><BR><BR>I am still strongly inclined toward setting up =
actions
with great<BR>consideration given to determining an action ratio =
that will
give proper<BR>regulation specs. If there is a desire to use =
hammers
whose weights fall<BR>outside of the boundaries that allow for a =
good match
of weight to leverage,<BR>then other solutions, or compromises will =
have to
be considered. For 99% of<BR>the actions I do, that seems
unnecessary. For that other 1%, assist springs<BR>seem to be =
the most
reasonable solution.<BR><BR>David Love<BR></FONT><FONT lang=0
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" face=Arial color=#000000 =
size=3
FAMILY="SANSSERIF"></BLOCKQUOTE><BR></FONT><FONT lang=0
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" face="Times New Roman" =
color=#000000 size=3
=
FAMILY="SERIF"> &n=
bsp;
David and
=
all<BR> =
I wholeheartedly agree. I find that when regulation parameters are =
compromised
that should be a screaming indication that something is not right. =
I.E. Sample
regulation notes are such a good indicator of potential problems with =
weight
and inertia and deciding how to rectify them and still stay within =
some fairly
reasonable hammer weights (strike weight if you prefer that term). =
Touch
weight in terms of inertia and leading or possible unleading decisions =
can
often quite easily be seen at this early stage of analysis. Although =
resolving
some action and key deficiencies can be complex and may require more =
in depth
analysis many are resolved by these simple diagnostic tools early in =
the
process. <BR> For example many of the Stwy =
actions I
(we)work on from the glory years (The 20's) require no more than =
a minor
knuckle movement (16 to 16.5 mm) to accommodate a slightly heavier =
hammer and
stay within the normal regulation ranges of .390 ish dip and 1 =
3/4 blow
distance. It's also easily possible to stay within the reasonable =
inertia
ranges and often the original pattern leading is sufficient and =
uniform enough
to retain or shift only slightly.<U> This is important as not many =
clients
will know or appreciate the difference of, or be able to utilize a =
completely
a microscopically balanced action.</U> There are practical financial
considerations to the client for all of this tweaking and microscopic
adjustment after all and this is a real life =
consideration.<BR>
For the action, technician or pianist desiring the micro-balanced =
action I'm
finding it a whole lot more effective and efficient, all be it more =
expensive,
to design the action and key ratios together by having a new key set =
made.
Roseland makes affordable key sets and sooo many or the old actions =
frankly
have been recovered, resoled , rebushed, and yes even repainted to the =
point
of necessary replacement that it only makes sense to go in this =
direction. Oh
also I left out just awful original geometry that moving the =
capstan,
etc., will not fix.<BR> I think that this whole idea =
of
"Component Action Balancing" Terry F.'s term, is a fabulous tool No =
modern
technician would be without but there are differing levels which it =
can be
applied and my point is to "Point that out" to prevent less =
indoctrinated or
experienced brethren on the list to be overwhelmed by the whole =
discussion of
action balancing and simply throw up there hands saying I'll never be =
able to
sell my clients all that so why try.<BR> As Bill Spurlock =
has
often said "many people were moved to tears, goose bumps, etc., by =
many of
these pianos" when they were new, which doesn't mean they were as =
refined as
we know they can be now but it's important to strive to do =
consistent
basic piano work first and add the more technical type skills as fast =
as one
can. In concluding Bill has also often said"It isn't necessary =
to
reinvent every action for every client" even though I'd personally =
like to.
Does that make sense to any body else.<BR> Just my view =
>Dale
Erwin</FONT><FONT lang=0 style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff"
face="Times New Roman" color=#000000 size=2
FAMILY="SERIF"><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></FONT></BODY></HTML>