Consistent key dip or blow distance?

[Regi Hedahl]

I regulated a Steinway M from the 50's and in order to attain a consistent key dip and aftertouch, I had to fudge on the blow distance. The choice was this or increase the blow distance on these several notes. What are your thoughts?

Regi Hedahl

[Joseph Garrett]

Regi,

Hmmm? I'd guess it has something to do with the knuckles.

Joe

Captain of the Tool Police
Squares R I
gpianoworks.com

[David Kroenlein]

Cant you raise the sharps a little, or remove some front rail punchings?

--
Sent from Gmail Mobile

[tnr...@aol.com]

Regi

 

You need a consistent blow distance. You can fudge a little on key dip. (up to .003).

Make sure the knuckles are round and that the jack is in the right place.

 

Wim

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Regi Hedahl <piano...@gmail.com>
To: pianotech <pian...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thu, May 19, 2016 5:03 pm
Subject: [pianotech] Consistent key dip or blow distance?

[Horace Greeley]

Hi. 

I think playing with the dip or blow is getting the cart before the horse.

Most of the parts we see (with the possible exception of the hammers and BR bushings) appear to be original...which means that one should probably start with original specs for regulating.  So, what is the key-height?  If it's too far (either up or down) from 2-19/32" (nominally 66mm), take everything back to that step.  Then, reset the dip.  Then see where you are.  If you still wind up with the hammer line looking like the picture, something else is wrong.  In the factory and C&A departments (up through long after this piano was built) "setting the touch" was not done until late in "second regulation" before the instrument went to "final tone regulation" .

This process has been (heavily) changed since the mid-1980's.

Kind regards.

Horace

[Regi Hedahl]

Yes, all the parts are original except the key bushings and key pins. The hammers are original and have nearly no wear. Key-height is 68.5mm. I don't think it's possible to lower it to the 66mm spec on this action. There are balance rail pins without any paper punchings.

Can pianists detect variations in blow distance with a consistent key dip?

Regi Hedahl

[David Skolnik]

I agree with Horace, mostly. Hammers and BR bushings look replaced.  But Regi has not said that the action geometry itself does not work... only that he is ending up with inconsistent aftertouch, unless he compromises the hammer blow-distance.  My 'horse and cart' might be a little different than Horace's.
To begin, I'd want to know how (and how accurately) Regi is assessing all these measurements - key height/level; key dip; after-touch; hammer blow;
If the keytops are original (and worn) it might permit some variation in setting key level.  If front rail bushings were replaced, it's possible that protruding cloth might alter the effective key dip.   The fact that the hammers are un-filed, with string grooves, could affect the let-off measurement.  Mostly, conversation would be helped by having accurate numbers on after-touch measurement.  I use 'lost-punching' method.

Another way to approach this is to consider what is required to achieve consistent parameters throughout the action: knuckle size and distance from centerpin; orientation of hammerflanges, as it affects centerpin and action spread; accuracy of action spread throughout action; extent to which hammer bore accurately reflects string height variations.  It takes such little variations in each of these to reflect in the aftertouch.  Actually, even the most careful bench regulation, to targets, ends up being a compromise, ignoring these individual variations.  Customizing hammer bore distance becomes somewhat irrelevant if you then revert to setting a straight hammer line.  Regi's line seems somewhat extreme, but shouldn't that line appear irregular if the string heights are uneven?  How else do you maintain that 'sacred' blow distance?

From a practical perspective, the question becomes how to divide and hide these (minor) discrepancies most subtly.  It's easier to play with dip of sharps than of naturals, as you don't have an immediately adjacent key with which to compare.  If differences are great, then, clearly, there is some anomalous geometry at work.  I'll experiment later this morning when I get to shop, but I don't think the forward and back positioning of the jack has that much to do with the let-off timing, though it can affect the feel of escapement, since the jack will begin to engage sooner if it's positioned distally.



David Skolnik
Hastings on Hudson, NY

---

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com

[David Kroenlein]

Someone probably replaced keytops woth thicker ones and didnt bother planing the keys down

[Regi Hedahl]

No, this piano still has its original ivory keytops.

As far as measurements, key height/level and key dip is perfectly consistent.   The only variation here is blow distant.

Regi

[Joseph Garrett]

Short answer? I think so.
Have you reconditioned the action? i.e. key bushings, bolster knuckles, repined all action centers out of spec, surfaced hammers, etc.?
Joe

Captain of the Tool Police
Squares R I
gpianoworks.com

-----Original Message-----
>From: Regi Hedahl <piano...@gmail.com>

>Sent: May 20, 2016 6:43 AM
>To: pianotech <pian...@googlegroups.com>
>Subject: Re: [pianotech] Consistent key dip or blow distance?
>

[Joseph Garrett]

Oooor, someone replaced the front rail punchings with inconsistent thicknesses?

I'll go with my mantra: If the keys aren't right, nothing else can be."

Joe

-----Original Message-----
From: David Kroenlein
Sent: May 20, 2016 6:49 AM
To: "pian...@googlegroups.com"
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Consistent key dip or blow distance?

Someone probably replaced keytops woth thicker ones and didnt bother planing the keys down

On Friday, May 20, 2016, Regi Hedahl <piano...@gmail.com> wrote:

Yes, all the parts are original except the key bushings and key pins.  The hammers are original and have nearly no wear.  Key-height is 68.5mm.  I don't think it's possible to lower it to the 66mm spec on this action.  There are balance rail pins without any paper punchings.

Can pianists detect variations in blow distance with a consistent key dip?

Regi Hedahl

--
Sent from Gmail Mobile

[Mike Spalding]

Regi,

If the key height can't be brought into spec with BR punchings, the
culprit is most likely the backrail cloth thickness. Does it look
original, or has it been replaced? If you replace it with thicker
cloth, the key height will come in, but you'll have to re-regulate the
dampers and sostenuto.

Mike

[Regi Hedahl]

Mike,

The backrail cloth is definitely original. It must have compressed over time. The actions feels very nice and even that I think I will call it good. I was just wondering about having to fudge on the strike distance on some notes.

Regi

[David Kroenlein]

Press the sharp and ivory simultaneously and then feel the level of the two keys by the capstan--there should be absutely no difference in height of the two keys--if there is, you need to change height of depth of either the sharps or ivories

[Regi Hedahl]

Joe,

This piano has had very little use during its lifetime. The hammers have never been resurfaced and not even any string marks. Right now I'm just trying to get it through a concert and then I'll completely redo the action with all brand new parts. As far as reconditioning, the only thing I have done is install new key pins, new bushing and of course regulated the action. The action centers are good enough. Knuckles are slightly compressed. Backcheck leather is as good as new.

Regi Hedahl

[David Skolnik]

So then, a few last questions:
Why are you replacing action?
How much aftertouch do you have?

Maybe it would be worthwhile figuring this out, before it shows up again.

David Skolnik

[David Skolnik]

Oh, and as for front to back jack position, it makes no difference.
David Skolnik

[Horace Greeley]

Hi, Regi,

On 5/20/2016 6:43 AM, Regi Hedahl wrote:
> Yes, all the parts are original except the key bushings and key pins.

In replacing the key pins and bushings, did you also replace the
punchings on the BR and FR? Is so, how thick are they? Your key-height
problem may be as simple as that.

Only FWIW, I greatly prefer to use the Crescendo punchings from Jurgen.

> The hammers are original and have nearly no wear.

OK.

> Key-height is 68.5mm. I don't think it's possible to lower it to the 66mm spec on this action.

See the above.

Also, on S&S, the key-height is measured from the top of the lip on the
keybed to the underside of the key; not the top.

> There are balance rail pins without any paper punchings.

This is not all that unusual on S&S.

> Can pianists detect variations in blow distance with a consistent key dip?

Oh, yes....besides the aesthetics of a hammer line that isn't.

Kind regards.

Horace


>
> Regi Hedahl

[Joseph Garrett]

Horace,
I've tried them for a few good players. Most said they thought the piano made their hands/wrists/arms hurt. That "no give landing" is a problem with some it seems. I have had a couple of positives in this regard. Just FYI.<G>
Best,
Joe

[Regi Hedahl]

Horace,

As far as measuring the key-height, do you mean measuring to the bottom of the keycap? If that's the case, then this one is measuring in at 67mm.

No, I did not replace the felt front key punchings. The balance rail uses half rounds. I just added a few paper punchings here and there to level the keys and get the key dip consistent. Everything on this piano is OE except for the key bushings and key pins.

Regi

[Regi Hedahl]

David,

Aftertouch is 0.03”.

I will be replacing the action when I rebuild this piano. Although what its currently got has lots of life left, it probably makes sense to replace it all so it looks and smells like brand new. I also can't wait to get rid of these hammers. They are full of lacquer. I aggressively steamed these hammers and the change is very slow. The amount of steam I have put into these hammers would have turned a non-lacquered cold pressed hammer in marshmallows.

Regi

[Personal]

From the picture that you sent, it looks to me like a white key/black key dip mismatch. How did you solve for black key dip? My preference is to set white key blow distance after setting dip, raising or lowering the hammer line to get my aftertouch goal. Black keys get their hammers set to match white keys, then change black dip to get aftertouch goal.

Not saying that 's the best way, just how I match white and black keys.

Tom Dowell

[Ron Nossaman]

On 5/20/2016 5:54 PM, Personal wrote:

> From the picture that you sent, it looks to me like a white key/black
> key dip mismatch.

That's the way it looked to me. An assumption was made that should have
been a decision.
Ron N

[Don]

Hi Regi,

Rinsing with acetone might be more effective that steam, on essentially "plastic" hammers.

 

Regards,
Don Rose
mailto:pian...@yahoo.com http://www.donrose.ca/
Box 37181, Regina, SK S4S 7K4
306-539-0716

---

From: Regi Hedahl <piano...@gmail.com>
To: pianotech <pian...@googlegroups.com>

Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 3:19 PM

Subject: Re: [pianotech] Consistent key dip or blow distance?

[Ed Foote]

Greetings,
A few things come to mind. If your dip and blow are both consistent, your aftertouch will not be. This is a fact of life on these actions. A common culprit is poorly drilled capstan lines being paired with irregular balance rail pins. Check that both are straight. After that, the irregular geometry causing this can be found in the spread changing due to hammer flanges not seating the same for all, or knuckles hung at various distances. The easiest to change is the capstans, as they can be moved fore and aft by using a small veneer shim in the hole to move the threads. I have seen these shims in a number of Steinways from the 50's and 60's.

In my experience, pianists will register differences in aftertouch long before they register differences in key dip. .010" is slightly over 2 % of key dip, but 31% of aftertouch. Many notes are played from an already depressed position, so dip is not part of the equation, there. In the case Regi mentioned, I would split the difference by increasing dip by .010" and raising the hammer until the aftertouch matched. I set dip by the aftertouch priority method taught by Chris Robinson. When I attended his class, I came home and went to the last job I had done, (Steinway artist piano), and reset the dip to even out the aftertouch. Even though that near perfect .390" dip I had set a week before was still where I left it, I noticed the aftertouch was NOT the same. I went through and set .035" aftertouch and let the dip go where it wanted to to do that, and the artist immediately felt the action was far more even on pianissimo playing.

I have used the aftertouch method every since, and people talk about these actions. Coupled with the WNG parts and a straight capstan line, it is possible to get closer to ideal evenness in aftertouch, blow, and dip than I ever could with wooden pieces.
Regards,

Ed Foote RPT

-----Original Message-----
From: 'Don' via pianotech <pian...@googlegroups.com>
To: pianotech <pian...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Fri, May 20, 2016 6:47 pm
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Consistent key dip or blow distance?

Hi Regi,


Rinsing with acetone might be more effective that steam, on essentially "plastic" hammers.


 
Regards,
Don Rose
mailto:pian...@yahoo.com http://www.donrose.ca/
Box 37181, Regina, SK S4S 7K4
306-539-0716

------------------------------------------------------------

[Geoff Sykes]

Can't see from the pic whether you have the key up-stop rail installed. Since the black key sticks rest slightly higher than the white key sticks on the front side of the balance rail, if you have the key up-stop rail too tight it will push all the black key hammers up a bit. If you attempted to regulate in that condition you would wind up with what you describe. DAMHIK. 

-- Geoff

[Joseph Garrett]

Regi,

Wrong technique! Give those hammers an Acetone bath! Once. Wait a half hour or so. Douse again. Wait. Douse again. Repeat as necessary. That will flush the lacquer down into the shoulders where it won't muck up things.<G> Then needle as a final thing. Has worked well for me.
Best,
Joe

Captain of the Tool Police
Squares R I
gpianoworks.com

-----Original Message-----
>From: Regi Hedahl <piano...@gmail.com>

[Regi Hedahl]

Joe,

Is it too late in the game to do the acetone bath now that I've already them got voiced down to where I want them to be with steam? I don't want to end up with a set of marshmallows. The voicing is quite nice right now and definitely on the mellow side. Had I known that these hammers were full of lacquer, the acetone bath is what I probably would have started off with. Is there a way to tell if hammers are impregnated with chemical hardeners?

Regi

[David Skolnik]

Ed -
Thank you for the reminders: the unattainability of the 'perfect' regulation, as well as where I originally learned about aftertouch priority. This was probably the same class where Chris talked about establishing the key height of the sharps in reverse order:  set desired height (from natural) of depressed sharp; determine requisite height needed to match aftertouch of naturals (already established). 
To your list of potential contributors to irregular geometry, I think you should add the item I suggested earlier: variable string height.  I'm not presently familiar with Chris Brown's bench set up, with regard to string targets, so I don't know if he's developed away to compensate for this, but, traditionally, we've used some sort of straight line (even if divided into sections) that ignores what can, at times, be significant height variations, within sections.  If we ignore these, we're accepting a degree of variability in our let-off.  If that's OK, then let-off becomes yet another optional repository of irregularity, along with dip and blow.  As I mentioned previously, even if you were to compensate with the hammer boring, you'd still have to accept an irregular hammer line (although with a consistent shank line).

Also, just based upon recent experience, Regi's '.030" ' might not actually be the same as mine, or yours.  This goes a bit to Horace's earlier mention of Crescendo front punchings.  For purposes of precision, they are excellent, to the point that, during earlier experiments, I was able to observe a difference in the aftertouch by using a .0015" balance punching, whereas we normally will go no thinner than the .003" (white).   On the other hand, I agree with Joe G that I don't particularly like the feel of them (even, and albeit, not being a pianist).  My point, though, is that we tend to interpret dip and aftertouch with some variation in compression, so, while using 'numbers' can be somewhat misleading when sharing our experience with one another, individual consistency is what's important.

I still think that, if Regi is intending to rebuild the action (even with hammers that he has gotten to sound good (he could always clean them up and spray them with 'New Smell' - from auto supply)), he should take the time to figure out the source of his current anomalies, as it could save him some considerable time later.  For example, I'm just disassembling a 1920's era Steinway M (original parts).  There are some sections where the wippen flanges were slightly shimmed.  The thickness of paper seems almost inconsequential, and yet, it was done for some reason.  It would make sense for me to know why, before proceeding.

David Skolnik
Hastings on Hudson, NY

At 09:56 PM 5/20/2016, you wrote:

Greetings,
   A few things come to mind.  If your dip and blow are both consistent, your aftertouch will not be.  This is a fact of life on these actions. A common culprit is poorly drilled capstan lines being paired with irregular balance rail pins.  Check that both are straight.  After that, the irregular geometry  causing this can be found in the spread changing due to hammer flanges not seating the same for all, or knuckles hung at various distances.  The easiest to change is the capstans, as they can be moved fore and aft by using a small veneer shim in the hole to move the threads.  I have seen these shims in a number of Steinways from the 50's and 60's. 

   In my experience, pianists will register differences in aftertouch long before they register differences in key dip.  .010" is slightly over  2 % of key dip, but 31% of aftertouch. Many notes are played from an already depressed position, so dip is not part of the equation, there.  In the case Regi mentioned, I would split the difference by increasing dip by .010" and raising the hammer until the aftertouch matched.  I set dip by the aftertouch priority method taught by Chris Robinson.  When I attended his class, I came home and went to the last job I had done, (Steinway artist piano), and reset the dip to even out the aftertouch.  Even though that near perfect .390" dip I had set a week before was still where I left it, I noticed the aftertouch was NOT the same.  I went through and set .035" aftertouch and let the dip go where it wanted to to do that, and   the artist immediately felt the action was far more even on pianissimo playing.

    I have used the aftertouch method every since, and people talk about these actions. Coupled with the WNG parts and a straight capstan line, it is possible to get closer to ideal evenness in aftertouch, blow, and dip than I ever could with wooden pieces.
Regards,

Ed Foote RPT

-----Original Message-----
From: 'Don' via pianotech <pian...@googlegroups.com>
To: pianotech <pian...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Fri, May 20, 2016 6:47 pm
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Consistent key dip or blow distance?



Hi Regi,


Rinsing with acetone might be more effective that steam, on essentially "plastic" hammers.

Â

Regards,
Don Rose
mailto:pian...@yahoo.com        http://www.donrose.ca/
Box 37181, Regina, SK S4S 7K4
306-539-0716



 
 
 
 
------------------------------------------------------------
 From: Regi Hedahl <piano...@gmail.com>
 To: pianotech <pian...@googlegroups.com>
 Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 3:19 PM
 Subject: Re: [pianotech] Consistent key dip or blow distance?
 
 

David,

Aftertouch is 0.03†. 

I will be replacing the action when I rebuild this piano.  Although what its currently got has lots of life left, it probably makes sense to replace it all so it looks and smells like brand new.  I also can't wait to get rid of these hammers.  They are full of lacquer.  I aggressively steamed these hammers and the change is very slow.  The amount of steam I have put into these hammers would have turned a non-lacquered cold pressed hammer in marshmallows.


Regi



 
 
 

Virus-free. www.avast.com

[Joseph Garrett]

Regi,
Any Steinway built after 1975 will most likely have heavy lacquer. That's when they got their new hammer presses. They still haven't figured out how to press them correctly. Of course they would need to start using the old reinforcing solution to get it right. (And, use Hide Glue instead of modern thermoset glues.) But, who am I to tell the great Steinway "gods" how to do things?

Best,
Joe

Captain of the Tool Police
Squares R I
gpianoworks.com


-----Original Message-----
>From: Regi Hedahl <piano...@gmail.com>

>Sent: May 21, 2016 6:13 AM
>To: pianotech <pian...@googlegroups.com>
>Subject: Re: [pianotech] Consistent key dip or blow distance?
>

[Ed Foote]

Ed Foote RPT

-----Original Message-----

From: David Skolnik
Ed -
>>To your list of potential contributors to irregular geometry, I think youshould add the item I suggested earlier: variable string height.(snip) we've used some sort of straight line (evenif divided into sections) that ignores what can, at times, be significantheight variations, within sections.  If we ignore these, we'reaccepting a degree of variability in our let-off.  If that's OK,then let-off becomes yet another optional repository of irregularity,along with dip and blow.  <<

I set let-off in the piano by playing the note and lifting the hammer up, adjusting until the hammer cannot be powered into a moving string. For performance, I aim to set let-off and drop as close outside the excursion zone of the string as possible. For normal use, I set perhaps 1/5 turn beyond. In this way, the let-off is set irrespective of all other things, as I consider it the most critical consistency in the action. The aftertouch then becomes a combination of dip and blow.


>> we tend to interpret dip and aftertouch with some variation in compression, so,while using 'numbers' can be somewhat misleading when sharing ourexperience with one another, individual consistency is what's important.<<

I agree, and I believe that most of us that regulate have far more discrimination in our hands than the performers. We spend our life playing ONE piece… I like to set the dip by aftertouch because it allows my sense of touch to be the final arbiter of all things. I have good training and 40 years invested in that sense of touch. When I am focussed on aftertouch, with a completely regulated action, I can press the key into the .35" spacer with extremely even pressure. Most of us can do this better than we think. Spend 30 minutes setting dip by pressing the key down, and most of us will surpass the pianists' ability to tell the difference between one key and the next. A convenient training approach is to have a a weight that can be placed on a piano key that is heavy enough to compress the front punching. Set the dip by aftertouch and then find a weight that just trips the jack with the spacer under the key. I'm telling you, most of us can get real accurate with a little focussed attention.
Regard,s

David Skolnik
Hastings on Hudson, NY


At 09:56 PM 5/20/2016, you wrote:
Greetings,

   A few things come to mind.  If your dip and blow areboth consistent, your aftertouch will not be.  This is a fact oflife on these actions. A common culprit is poorly drilled capstan linesbeing paired with irregular balance rail pins.  Check that both arestraight.  After that, the irregular geometry  causing this canbe found in the spread changing due to hammer flanges not seating thesame for all, or knuckles hung at various distances.  The easiest tochange is the capstans, as they can be moved fore and aft by using asmall veneer shim in the hole to move the threads.  I have seenthese shims in a number of Steinways from the 50's and 60's. 

   In my experience, pianists will register differences inaftertouch long before they register differences in key dip. .010" is slightly over  2 % of key dip, but 31% of aftertouch.Many notes are played from an already depressed position, so dip is notpart of the equation, there.  In the case Regi mentioned, I wouldsplit the difference by increasing dip by .010" and raising thehammer until the aftertouch matched.  I set dip by the aftertouchpriority method taught by Chris Robinson.  When I attended hisclass, I came home and went to the last job I had done, (Steinway artistpiano), and reset the dip to even out the aftertouch.  Even thoughthat near perfect .390" dip I had set a week before was still whereI left it, I noticed the aftertouch was NOT the same.  I wentthrough and set .035" aftertouch and let the dip go where it wantedto to do that, and   the artist immediately felt the action wasfar more even on pianissimo playing.

    I have used the aftertouch method every since, andpeople talk about these actions. Coupled with the WNG parts and astraight capstan line, it is possible to get closer to ideal evenness inaftertouch, blow, and dip than I ever could with wooden pieces.

Regards,

Ed Foote RPT

-----Original Message-----
From: 'Don' via pianotech <pian...@googlegroups.com>
To: pianotech <pian...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Fri, May 20, 2016 6:47 pm
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Consistent key dip or blow distance?



Hi Regi,


Rinsing with acetone might be more effective that steam, on essentially"plastic" hammers.


Â
Regards,
Don Rose
mailto:pian...@yahoo.com      http://www.donrose.ca/
Box 37181, Regina, SK S4S 7K4
306-539-0716



 
 
 
 
------------------------------------------------------------
 From: Regi Hedahl <piano...@gmail.com>
 To: pianotech <pian...@googlegroups.com>
 Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 3:19 PM
 Subject: Re: [pianotech] Consistent key dip or blow distance?
 
 

David,

Aftertouch is 0.03†. 

I will be replacing the action when I rebuild this piano.  Althoughwhat its currently got has lots of life left, it probably makes sense toreplace it all so it looks and smells like brand new.  I also can'twait to get rid of these hammers.  They are full of lacquer. I aggressively steamed these hammers and the change is very slow. The amount of steam I have put into these hammers would have turned anon-lacquered cold pressed hammer in marshmallows.


Regi



 
 
 
Virus-free. www.avast.com

[Regi Hedahl]

I would like to thank Ed Foote for so helpfully sharing his thoughts on the subject. This is exactly what I was looking for and the explanation made sense. So I tried it out on this Steinway. This result is a more even touch than I ever thought was possible on this piano. I noticed it right away playing softly.

I am now curious on what do you do for aftertouch in the bass section? Letoff is set slightly farther from the coiled strings which increases the aftertouch. Do you increase the strike distance so that aftertouch is the same as on the plain strings?

As far as the anomalies with the hammer line, it's all fixed now. I noticed that on the worst key, the capstan started out at the same level as the others but with the key depressed, it was higher than the rest. I removed the key to investigate what was the problem but didn't see anything wrong. So I put the key back in and it did not do that anymore. I'm not sure what did this but something caused the ratio to change until I pulled the keystick out and put it back in.

The rest of the anomalies were probably due to what Ed was explaining. I fudged a slight amount on the key dip and hammer height. The hammer line is now just slightly uneven from one note to the other now but aftertouch is all dialed in at exactly at 0.30”.

Regi Hedahl

[Ron Nossaman]

On 5/21/2016 1:44 PM, Regi Hedahl wrote:
> I would like to thank Ed Foote for so helpfully sharing his thoughts on
> the subject. This is exactly what I was looking for and the explanation
> made sense. So I tried it out on this Steinway. This result is a more
> even touch than I ever thought was possible on this piano. I noticed it
> right away playing softly.

Some years ago, when I was first starting to desecrate the sacred design
of industry icons, I got to thinking about the typical priorities and
chiseled in granite measurements of action regulation. I set key height
and dip as accurately as I could, also letoff and after touch, letting
blow distance be determined from that. After going over it a couple of
times, I still didn't like the feel of the uniformity of after touch.
Drop felt right, but I could still feel differences. So I diddled the
let off until the feel was uniform. Looking at it, the differences in
let off difference were very slight, but the difference in feel was very
positive. Another tech who had expressed an interest in trying it out
when I was done remarked on the uniformity of feel (without prompting on
my part), and said he rarely got to play the piece he was playing
because so few pianos would respond well as that level of play. I
mentioned it to Ed over a sawdust burger lunch in Providence, and he was
horrified, as was everyone else I mentioned it to. But the comment from
the pianist wasn't "why is the let off uneven?", it was "feels so even
and controllable". So I've gone for feel over measurement since then,
whatever it takes. I think we need to be willing to give up a few
decimal points for function in action regulation just like we should
(but don't) in a lot of other details of piano work.

For what it's worth.
Ron N

[David Skolnik]

Regi -
I just did a non-definitive experiment with note Ao on a Steinway D. Within the limits of tools and technique, here's what I found (measured @ 1.5" from hammer, toward bridge):
- vertical displacement at attack = .116"
- vertical displacement 1 second after attack = .018"
- distance from underside of string which precluded hammer interference with string envelope = .048" (3/64")

The numbers might not make absolute sense, but I actually have work to do (dampers).  Point is, I think that the after-touch based technique would work equally here, using blow distance to modify.

David Skolnik

At 02:44 PM 5/21/2016, you wrote:

I would like to thank Ed Foote for so helpfully sharing his thoughts on the subject. This is exactly what I was looking for and the explanation made sense. So I tried it out on this Steinway. This result is a more even touch than I ever thought was possible on this piano. I noticed it right away playing softly.


I am now curious on what do you do for aftertouch in the bass section? Letoff is set slightly farther from the coiled strings which increases the aftertouch. Do you increase the strike distance so that aftertouch is the same as on the plain strings?


As far as the anomalies with the hammer line, it's all fixed now. I noticed that on the worst key, the capstan started out at the same level as the others but with the key depressed, it was higher than the rest. I removed the key to investigate what was the problem but didn't see anything wrong. So I put the key back in and it did not do that anymore. I'm not sure what did this but something caused the ratio to change until I pulled the keystick out and put it back in.

The rest of the anomalies were probably due to what Ed was explaining. I fudged a slight amount on the key dip and hammer height. The hammer line is now just slightly uneven from one note to the other now but aftertouch is all dialed in at exactly at 0.30†.


Regi Hedahl

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 8:56:10 PM UTC-5, ed foote wrote:

Greetings,

   A few things come to mind.  If your dip and blow are both consistent, your aftertouch will not be.  This is a fact of life on these actions. A common culprit is poorly drilled capstan lines being paired with irregular balance rail pins.  Check that both are straight.  After that, the irregular geometry  causing this can be found in the spread changing due to hammer flanges not seating the same for all, or knuckles hung at various distances.  The easiest to change is the capstans, as they can be moved fore and aft by using a small veneer shim in the hole to move the threads.  I have seen these shims in a number of Steinways from the 50's and 60's.  

   In my experience, pianists will register differences in aftertouch long before they register differences in key dip.  .010" is slightly over  2 % of key dip, but 31% of aftertouch. Many notes are played from an already depressed position, so dip is not part of the equation, there.  In the case Regi mentioned, I would split the difference by increasing dip by .010" and raising the hammer until the aftertouch matched.  I set dip by the aftertouch priority method taught by Chris Robinson.  When I attended his class, I came home and went to the last job I had done, (Steinway artist piano), and reset the dip to even out the aftertouch.  Even though that near perfect .390" dip I had set a week before was still where I left it, I noticed the aftertouch was NOT the same.  I went through and set .035" aftertouch and let the dip go where it wanted to to do that, and   the artist immediately felt the action was far more even on pianissimo playing.

    I have used the aftertouch method every since, and people talk about these actions. Coupled with the WNG parts and a straight capstan line, it is possible to get closer to ideal evenness in aftertouch, blow, and dip than I ever could with wooden pieces.

Regards,

Ed Foote RPT

Virus-free. www.avast.com

[David Boyce]

On 21/05/2016 19:34, Ron Nossaman wrote:

> But the comment from the pianist wasn't "why is the let off uneven?",
> it was "feels so even and controllable". So I've gone for feel over
> measurement since then, whatever it takes. I think we need to be
> willing to give up a few decimal points for function in action
> regulation just like we should (but don't) in a lot of other details
> of piano work.

Sounds so sensible that it's bound to be heresy.

Best regards,

David B.

[Ron Nossaman]

On 5/21/2016 2:53 PM, David Boyce wrote:

> Sounds so sensible that it's bound to be heresy.

It is. Ask around...
Ron N

[Will Truitt]

Numbers, like statistics, don't always tell the truths we need to know. Many times I have begun regulating a piano by the factory specs, while remaining cognizant that the factories so often don't honor them. I've developed an internal "itbugsme" meter where the numbers are telling me that everything is hunky dory, and what I am feeling in my hands is telling me something different. I can get this feeling even in the relatively static act of regulating. I don't know what it is, but I start looking for things. Eventually, I find it and make the necessary changes. Often it is the indicator of deeper underlying problems in the action set up.

I don't even play piano, but I have developed a high degree of sensitivity as Ed describes over the years. And that is also true for aftertouch (I'm an aftertouch priority guy). The amount of aftertouch I set is individualized to a piano. I might start setting it at .050 but change it to .040 or whatever because that is what feels better on that piano. The piano tells you where it wants to be.

If it has not been mentioned already, I think that a careful and correct hammer bore is vitally important to a good regulation and things like blow and aftertouch. Minimally, boring the hammers per each section, as needed. If the bore varies too much within a section, I will taper the bore from one end of the section to the other. On very rare occasions, I have had the taper follow an elevated mid-section because the error was so great.

Gosh, Ron, you're getting all touchy-feely on us. Whoda thunk? :-)

Will Truitt

-----Original Message-----
From: pian...@googlegroups.com [mailto:pian...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Ron Nossaman
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2016 3:56 PM
To: pian...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Consistent key dip or blow distance?

[Ron Nossaman]

On 5/21/2016 3:42 PM, Will Truitt wrote:
> The piano tells you where it wants to
> be.

Exactly. The piano, not the numbers.

> If it has not been mentioned already, I think that a careful and
> correct hammer bore is vitally important to a good regulation and
> things like blow and aftertouch.

As has been abundantly demonstrated, there is a long list of things that
may not be exactly "right" (by the numbers), but we usually have to
regulate what we have to work with as best we can. See your previous point.

> Gosh, Ron, you're getting all touchy-feely on us. Whoda thunk? :-)

Just my left index finger. Gotta keep a close watch on that sucker.

And the litter of opossums we're raising seem to think I'm pretty cuddly.
Ron N

[David Skolnik]

Ron said:

And the litter of opossums we're raising seem to think I'm pretty cuddly.

Can't figure out which is the most inappropriate, so am including both:

- Wait til they're old enough to post on this list.
- Pets or Meat?

Actually, that picture zero's out anything else you may have (or will) do wrong.

David Skolnik
Hastings on Hudson, NY

Virus-free. www.avast.com

[Ron Nossaman]

On 5/21/2016 4:43 PM, David Skolnik wrote:
>
> - Wait til they're old enough to post on this list.
> - Pets or Meat?

Rescue.

> Actually, that picture zero's out anything else you may have (or will)
> do wrong.

Wrong by who's criteria?
Ron N

[David Boyce]

> And the litter of opossums we're raising seem to think I'm pretty cuddly.
> Ron N

Wow, I didn't know what opossums looked like. How sweet. Curiously, I
just googled them, and Wikipedia has a photo with caption "A Virginia
opossum inhabiting a piano in Houston, Texas, shortly before its release".

It's not clear whether the opossum or the piano was released......

David B.

[Ron Nossaman]

On 5/21/2016 4:59 PM, David Boyce wrote:
>
>> And the litter of opossums we're raising seem to think I'm pretty cuddly.
>> Ron N

> Wow, I didn't know what opossums looked like. How sweet. Curiously, I
> just googled them, and Wikipedia has a photo with caption "A Virginia
> opossum inhabiting a piano in Houston, Texas, shortly before its release".
>
> It's not clear whether the opossum or the piano was released......
>
> David B.
>

They were probably both getting pretty gamy, so it's anybody's guess. I
once wrote a newsletter article on feral pianos, and have met many.
We've raised individual opossums in the past too, as pets. This is our
first litter, and they are going out into the world when they're ready -
whether we are or not. There will be a bowl of cheap dog food on the
back porch every night this summer.
Ron N

[David Weiss]

"I set dip by the aftertouch priority method taught by Chris Robinson."

What is the method taught by Chris Robinson?

Thanks,

David Weiss

[David Skolnik]

Hadn't considered Rescue, or 'Service' either.
As for criteria for 'wrong'? Why, mine, of course.  We've already determined there's nothing universal in this universe.
And finally: Dog food on the porch.  A hard invite to ignore, but why cheap?  BYOB or provided?

Is this the end of this thread, or just a commercial break?

David S

Virus-free. www.avast.com

[David Skolnik]

Ed can correct me, but I think the simplest way to describe it (as I do it) would be:
- establish the working parameters of the regulation to target the desired amount of aftertouch.  Apart from what simply 'feels right', it should clearly allow unfettered escapement with some margin for compression and wear, while avoiding jamming jacks into stop felt. 
- regulate action setting natural key level and dip in usual way. For sharps, establish desired height above naturals when dipped.  Then determine correct height to provide corresponding aftertouch as in naturals.  Level sharps.
- when refining regulation adjust actual dip, hammer height (or let-off!!!) to provide consistent aftertouch.

If I'm wrong, I'll learn.

David Skolnik

Aftertouch is 0.03†. 

I will be replacing the action when I rebuild this piano.  Although what its currently got has lots of life left, it probably makes sense to replace it all so it looks and smells like brand new.  I also can't wait to get rid of these hammers.  They are full of lacquer.  I aggressively steamed these hammers and the change is very slow.  The amount of steam I have put into these hammers would have turned a non-lacquered cold pressed hammer in marshmallows.


Regi



 
 
 

Virus-free. www.avast.com

[Regi Hedahl]

Ron,

Thanks for another excellent tip.  I have just done this to this action and it is smoother and more consistent than ever.  Now I may never be able to rebuild this action.

Regi Hedahl

[Ron Nossaman]

On 5/21/2016 5:55 PM, Regi Hedahl wrote:
> Ron,
>
> Thanks for another excellent tip. I have just done this to this action
> and it is smoother and more consistent than ever. Now I may never be
> able to rebuild this action.

You're welcome and, sorry about that. It's one of those things where
you've done everything "right" and still don't like it. So...
Ron N

[Ed Foote]

-----Original Message-----
From: David Weiss

"I set dip by the aftertouch priority method taught by Chris Robinson."

What is the method taught by Chris Robinson?

Thanks, David Weiss

Chris taught that after the blow and let-off and key-level were set, the amount of aftertouch could be set by placing, say .040" punching on the front and pressing the key down until it just allows the jack to escape with a certain contact pressure on the punching. Taking the punching out leaves that amount. Consistency is dependent on the technician's sense of touch.
Regards,.

[Will Truitt]

What Ed says is how I have been doing it for a long time.

However, I have recently changed my protocol to using a weight of about 300 grams set on the keytop and cycling it through let off with the punching thickness of choice, also doing it by feel estimation of the right size of punching. When it is right, it will just trip through let off. I'll check myself by finally setting my very thinnest .002 punching to see if it cycles through. Leave it there if it does, take it out if it doesn't.

How heavy that gram weight is will determine just how much aftertouch you finally end up with, due to felt compression. I do like the Crescendo front rail punchings, as it gives a crisper feel to the finish.

How little aftertouch you can safely use will be dependent on what you are working with. And certainly the climate cycle is a consideration - in New Hampshire it can get bone dry in the winter and the amount of aftertouch and blow distance can vary considerably with the seasonal changes.

I think it is important for a good tech to develop feeling for the action and the "sixth sense" that comes with it. It's much better for us to feel that something is still rotten in Denmark than to have the customer tell us they don't like it and can't tell us why. If I need to backtrack and do some detective work, I would rather catch it as early as possible so as to limit my own extra contribution of time and solve the problem before the player puts his/her hand on the piano.

Will Truitt

-----Original Message-----
From: 'Ed Foote' via pianotech [mailto:pian...@googlegroups.com]
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2016 8:46 PM
To: pian...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Consistent key dip or blow distance?

[David Weiss]

Makes sense.  Thanks

Virus-free. www.avast.com

 

[Ed Foote]

Ed Foote RPT

] On Behalf Of David Skolnik
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2016 6:47 PM
To: pian...@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [pianotech] Consistent key dip or blow distance?

 

>>- when refining regulation adjust actual dip, hammer height (or let-off!!!) to provide consistent aftertouch.

Greetings,
I don't introduce variable distances in my let-off because it is a major determining factor in how softly a note can be controlled. greater let-off requires both more velocity to bridge the gap and more control over how much energy is delivered to the string. The lighter the hammer, the more it is important, as there is less mass in relation to friction and spring resistance at escapement. I equate let-off to pitching pennies against a wall, the farther you are from it, the harder it is to land right at the edge.
I suppose this is where some of us differ. My regulation protocol has evolved over my career, applying the occasional epiphany,(Robinson) to the basic education, (Garlick), and then doing what suggests itself by listening to the feedback of the most critical pianists I could find. Ronnie Milsap, after 30 seconds of trying out a regulation on his piano called me back over a 1/16" difference in let-off on C#5. I decided not to let that happen again, and let-off is not a variable in my regulation. I think it far easier to split the difference between dip and blow.
I do draw lines between performance work and home maintenance, i.e. it is a rare amateur that can tell the difference between the $ 3,000 action regulation, (includes a of pinning, weighing, shaping, and leading) and the $ 1,000 adjustment job, but they all weigh the financial difference the same. If all I did was the former, I would have some long spells between work, and if I were exclusively the latter, I would never have refined my process.
Regards,

[Ron Nossaman]

On 5/22/2016 11:29 AM, 'Ed Foote' via pianotech wrote:
>
>
Ronnie Milsap, after 30 seconds of
> trying out a regulation on his piano called me back over a 1/16"
> difference in let-off on C#5.

I knew I should have specified a number. 1/16" is a HUGE difference, and
I'd never consider doing that. The letoff differences I was talking
about are more like 0.5mm. A final refinement, not a coarse adjustment.
It's not the exactness of the dimension, it's the uniformity of the feel
that pianists I've consulted notice. Control is in the feel, and a 0.5mm
difference from one note to another is likely a closer tolerance than
most pianos get regulated to in the first place, whatever the tech
claims. It's not the difference in effort to propel that hammer across
another 0.5mm that the pianist feels, it's the timing of the
letoff/after touch and the feel of the resistance that they notice -
just like we can during regulation if we pay at least as much attention
to the feel as we do to the measurement.

I offered this idea because I have found it useful on occasion, with the
full expectation of another witch hunt of exaggerated horrors from
deviating from accepted gospel. So feel free to disregard it entirely,
but don't try to make it something it isn't.
Ron N

[David Skolnik]

(I wrote this earlier but neglected to send)

Will Truitt said:

my very thinnest .002 punching

I'd like to know where you obtain your .002" punchings, as the thinnest front punchings I've seen commercially available or the .003" white paper.  I think I know what you mean, though, as I've done experiments using a weight in combination with crescendo felt punching and the thinnest balance rail paper, which IS about .0015".   I've found this illuminating, mostly in parsing the micro-components of escapement: where it actually begins/ends, as opposed to aftertouch, which is some degree of safety.  (I still don't like the feel of Crescendo punchings so much in playing, but they are very precise in regulating.)  However, what we've been talking about here would seem to challenge the efficacy of such precision, if we're willing to accept (or even encourage) some variation in key dip in favor of aftertouch. 

(continued thoughts in response to Ed's and Ron's later posts)

David Skolnik
Hastings on Hudson, NY

At 04:36 AM 5/22/2016, you wrote:

What Ed says is how I have been doing it for a long time.

However, I have recently changed my protocol to using a weight of about 300 grams set on the keytop and cycling it through let off with the punching thickness of choice, also doing it by feel estimation of the right size of punching.  When it is right, it will just trip through let off.  I'll check myself by finally setting my very thinnest .002 punching to see if it cycles through.  Leave it there if it does, take it out if it doesn't. 

How heavy that gram weight is will determine just how much aftertouch you finally end up with, due to felt compression.  I do like the Crescendo front rail punchings, as it gives a crisper feel to the finish. 

How little aftertouch you can safely use will be dependent on what you are working with.  And certainly the climate cycle is a consideration - in New Hampshire it can get bone dry in the winter  and the amount of aftertouch and blow distance can vary considerably with the seasonal changes. 

I think it is important for a good tech to develop feeling for the action and the "sixth sense" that comes with it.  It's much better for us to feel that something is still rotten in Denmark than to have the customer tell us they don't like it and can't tell us why.  If I need to backtrack and do some detective work, I would rather catch it as early as possible so as to limit my own extra contribution of time and solve the problem before the player puts his/her hand on the piano. 

Will Truitt

-

Virus-free. www.avast.com

[David Skolnik]

Ron said:

 It's not the difference in effort to propel that hammer across another 0.5mm that the pianist feels, it's the timing of the letoff/after touch and the feel of the resistance that they notice

and Ed said:

 The lighter the hammer, the more [consistent let-off] is important, as there is less mass in relation to friction and spring resistance at escapement.

Both gentlemen make reference to the element that precedes aftertouch: escapement, which, when properly regulated, begins with the simultaneous engagement of both the jack and repetition lever.  The resistance encountered is the product of spring compression, the degree of resistance of which is influenced by hammer mass, and pinning friction of repetition lever and hammer shank,  and friction of the jack/knuckle interface, which, in turn, is a product of geometry, lubricity of surfaces, and hammer mass.  Within the narrow parameters that we are speaking of, it's difficult to strictly adhere to a specific let-off measurement, without allowing for the differences in escapement resistance and the way a particular pianist might deal with it.  If that resistance factor is high, a very close let-off can tend to encourage double striking/bobbling, and soft playing can be inhibited by the need to accelerate through that resistance.

No witch hunts anticipated.

David Skolnik
Hastings on Hudson, NY

Date: Sun, 22 May 2016 12:29:25 -0400
From: 'Ed Foote' via pianotech <pian...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Consistent key dip or blow distance?

Greetings,
       I don't introduce variable distances in my let-off because it is a major determining factor in how softly a note can be controlled.  greater let-off requires both more velocity to bridge the gap and  more control over how much energy is delivered to the string. The lighter the hammer, the more it is important, as there is less mass in relation to friction and spring resistance at escapement.  I equate  let-off to pitching pennies against a wall, the farther you are from it, the harder it is to land right at the edge.

    I suppose this is where some of us differ.  My regulation protocol has evolved over my career, applying the occasional epiphany,(Robinson) to the basic education, (Garlick), and then doing what suggests itself by listening to the feedback of the most critical pianists I could find. Ronnie Milsap, after 30 seconds of trying out a regulation on his piano called me back over a 1/16" difference in let-off on C#5. I decided not to let that happen again, and let-off is not a variable in my regulation. I think it far easier to split the difference between dip and blow.

Virus-free. www.avast.com

[David Skolnik]

At 04:42 PM 5/21/2016, Will Truitt wrote:

...

If it has not been mentioned already, I think that a careful and correct hammer bore is vitally important to a good regulation and things like blow and aftertouch.  Minimally, boring the hammers per each section, as needed.  If the bore varies too much within a section, I will taper the bore from one end of the section to the other.  On very rare occasions, I have had the taper follow an elevated mid-section because the error was so great.  

Will,
I mentioned it multiple times during this thread.  The 'problem' , again, becomes one of degree of precision. If the string plane is consistent, even if graduated, setting a 'hammer line' is possible, however, with any erratic string heights, customized boring will only be effective if the blow distance is set individually (i.e. not in a line).  Care would also need to be taken with any 'gang' filing of hammers.

David Skolnik
Hastings on Hudson, NY

Virus-free. www.avast.com

[Will Truitt]

You are right.  It is the .003 punchings.  Not at the shop, could not remember if they were .002 or .003. 

 

Will

 

From: pian...@googlegroups.com [mailto:pian...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of David Skolnik

Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2016 8:58 PM
To: pian...@googlegroups.com

[Will Truitt]

David, can you elaborate on what you are referring to when gang filing?

 

Will

 

 

From: pian...@googlegroups.com [mailto:pian...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of David Skolnik

Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2016 9:54 PM
To: pian...@googlegroups.com

[David Skolnik]

Sure - when a group of hammers is supported by straight edge and filed in multiples with a strip of sandpaper, sometimes backed with masking or other tape.  This allows for a certain consistency but would obliterate any differences note to note, in bore distance.  Am I wrong?

David S

Virus-free. www.avast.com

[Joseph Garrett]

No you are correct because the tail distance has not been mentioned in this "boring" procedure. It should have been though.<G>

Joe

Captain of the Tool Police
Squares R I
gpianoworks.com

[Will Truitt]

That’s what I thought you meant.  The answer is yes and no.  If I am hanging new hammers, I get them overlong and gang file in a jig before I bore them or cut them to length, or anything else.  So no there.  But, if I were trying to gang file a previously hung set, yes, you are correct. 

 

I have only tapered towards the high point in the middle of a section a couple of times in the 35 plus years that I have been boring my own sets because the plate was so bad.  It is all but a non-issue.

[Will Truitt]

An important dimension, indeed, Joe.  And one that hammer suppliers who bore for technicians all but ignore.  It is a struggle to get certain hammer makers to provide hammers with a long enough OAL where the tails can be cut to the exact desired tail length after boring.  Not an issue with Ronsen, though.

 

Will

[Douglas Gregg]

I totally agree with Ron. The right touch is very much about getting just enough letoff . I aim to prevent double striking or blocking. With the minimal letoff clearance and the right aftertouch, the pianist can "play off the jacks". That is, as you press through the aftertouch, it should just play the note very lightly.  It is about 1/2 turn off of blocking on those fine threads. Granted, with some pianos you can't  get away with that, but for a concert tuning, pianists love it. Change of humidity can change that clearance too and I have gotten  few recalls when the humidity goes up, but I can live with that.

Doug Gregg

[Will Truitt]

Usually the only recalls that I get on a close let off are an hour or more away.  L

 

Will Truitt

[Ron Nossaman]

On 5/23/2016 8:09 AM, Will Truitt wrote:
> Usually the only recalls that I get on a close let off are an hour or
> more away.

This is precisely why I don't set minimal let off. That 0.5mm I quoted
was potential deviation from the neighboring hammer to even the feel,
not a let off setting. Minimum let off isn't necessary to control;
uniformity of feel is.
Ron N

[Will Truitt]

It's not as if I don't understand these things, Ron. When you have worked hard to set up an action from the ground floor, there is a natural tendency for you to want it to function optimally - to be transparent, sensitive, subtle, and expressive. Amongst the many things that must be there if we are going to get the very best from an action is a close let off. A hammer that is set very close also will be more prone to kissing the string, phantom blocking, etc.

We have all seen actions that have been regulated, but the let off and the drop and other things are set very "safely". They function reliably, but are as exciting to play as driving a plow horse. So it is a matter of finding a happy medium where the action plays well and is reliable. That line and where it lies is individual to each piano.

Will

-----Original Message-----
From: pian...@googlegroups.com [mailto:pian...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Ron Nossaman
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 1:20 PM
To: pian...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Consistent key dip or blow distance?

[Ron Nossaman]

On 5/23/2016 1:08 PM, Will Truitt wrote:
> It's not as if I don't understand these things, Ron. When you have
> worked hard to set up an action from the ground floor, there is a
> natural tendency for you to want it to function optimally - to be
> transparent, sensitive, subtle, and expressive. Amongst the many
> things that must be there if we are going to get the very best from
> an action is a close let off. A hammer that is set very close also
> will be more prone to kissing the string, phantom blocking, etc.
>
> We have all seen actions that have been regulated, but the let off
> and the drop and other things are set very "safely". They function
> reliably, but are as exciting to play as driving a plow horse. So it
> is a matter of finding a happy medium where the action plays well and
> is reliable. That line and where it lies is individual to each
> piano.

Exactly. A happy medium.
Ron N

[David Boyce]

On 23/05/2016 18:22, Ron Nossaman wrote:
> A happy medium.
> Ron N

A happy medium: a fortune-teller who won the lottery........

Sorry.

David B.