Accu-just HPs in Steinway D :

[Ron Nossaman]

>
> Not really a Steinwin either, because If the vertical pins were installed in
> the same location as the original pins, the design is wrong anyway.  


Wrong, or just different than the original? Define "wrong" please, in this
context.


>
> The relocation of the rear waste length termination from the duplex bar to
> the hitch pin resulted in a lower impedance.


How so? Does not compute. Lower impedance in what, and why?


>
>   I would think that a responsible retrofit would either place the pins at
> the duplex points or redesign the backlength to ensure an appropriate
> placement (either by knowing enough to design this, or consulting with
> someone who does).   


With three hitch pins anchoring two unisons, assuming no tied loops, how, pray
tell, could the "duplex" lengths be duplicated by creative hitch pin placement?
I'd really like to hear how that is possible. Failing that, what constitutes
"appropriate" placement? I assume you're referring to backscale length here
rather than alignment.


>
> If it sounds good as is, great, otherwise I wouldn't leave it as it is unless
> you are sure that the change in backlength did not contribute to the problem.


What problem? I didn't see anything in the original post indicating that any of
this was a problem other than it was considered to be a sloppy job, sans
details, and it wasn't like it was originally done. Is the implied "problem" a
performance, or a political issue?


>
>  I am not keen on returning the duplex bar without getting rid of the
> vertical pin, since the pin will now be inclined to creep up. 


Enough to fail to adequately terminate the string at the aliquot? How much
deflection angle is necessary behind an aliquot? Precious little, I would
think. Please correct me if I'm mistaken.


>
> Kent Webb has gotta see this one.  Get some good pictures for him, and he
> could use them in a program as a gag intro. 
>
> Bill Shull


Only if he, or you, can say if, and why it's wrong.

Ron N