What is Inertia

[Richard Brekne]

Ed Sutton wrote:
> 
> Richard-
> 
> My dictionary agrees with Don.
> 
> But what we are trying to do here (I think?), is try to make piano actions better
> for the pianists.
> Since there are so many kinds of pianists, there might be many ways to make pianos
> better, of more adapted to various players and ways of playing.
> 
> And in particular, we were concerned with the placement of key leads.  For a long
> time many of us have followed the rule of thumb that it was better to produce a
> given front weight by placing a large quantity of lead close to the balance rail
> than by placing a smaller quantity close to the front, that this makes the action
> "feel better" and repeat faster, at least in the bass octaves.
>

I think that is sound, as long as one is referenceing our "moment of
inertia" in the sense that placeing leads closer will lower that moment
for the same weighoff condition. Today, we have a much better way of
expressing that sentence... Because of Stanwoods contribution to our
metrology, which I think we should all adopt. Useing that I could
rephrase my first statment thus... 

"I think that is sound, as long as we are choosing the lowest moment of
inertia for equal front weight quantities."

Then you know exactly what I mean. In the end the lowest moment of
interia possible seems to be directly related to the fastest repetition
possible. But then the fastes repetition possible as an isolated touch
concern is not necesarilly a good thing, and in any case there are other
touch concerns that need to be dealt with, and some of these are moment
of inertia related. 


>...............
> 
> Happy holidays to everyone.  I'm very grateful for this list.
> 
> Ed Sutton

Amen to that Ed. Greatful is a fine word... to this list, and each and
every one of you. 

Cheers and Merry Christmas
RicB