Paper Punchings Archiac?

[Tom Cole]

Sy,

>From a logical standpoint, you are right on. There are many ideas,
invented back when labor was cheap, that would never make it off the
drawing boards if proposed today. But having done something a certain
way for so long, a manufacturer would be loathe to deviate from such a
well-worn path. 

But, again speaking from a logical perspective, if you make a piano
easier to adjust, tune or fix, it is more likely to be in better state
of adjustment, tune or repair. Given an upright with a shortened key
stroke the cause of bobbling hammers, for example, many owners will take
the much cheaper alternative of letoff adjustment rather than to bring
the keys up to their proper level. If the keys could be leveled with a
screwdriver, the right thing would be done.

I'm sure there are other clavier contrivances that deserve to be
rethought in light of present day labor costs and inventions spurred by
our fast-paced lifestyle and cross-pollination from other disciplines. I
think that what makes the paper punching adjustment method archaic, in
my mind, is that there are better ideas out there.

If you get up on the IBM Patent Server Home Page <www.patents.ibm.com/>
and type in "piano key", you will get some interesting results,
including two patents, since 1971, for key leveling devices. One of them
(patent #5654515, 1990) is a Steinway idea using levers for adjustment
and another (#5035168, 1995) is very similar to John Gibson's adjuster
only with a locking feature to maintain adjustment.

I have personally seen a third invention in a grand piano which had the
normal balance rail and pins (bendable for key squaring), but the keys
were supported by separate adjusting screws looking like upsidedown
capstan screws screwed into the underside of the keys, just in front of
the balance holes. White felt was laid on the balance rail in front of
the balance pins and the capstan screw heads rested on that felt. Key
leveling was accomplished with a screwdriver inserted through a hole in
the top of each key into a slot cut in the upper end of the adjuster.

Inasmuch as the key level of this piano was no less than perfect after
many years of playing and no regulating, I would say that this is a very
successful system. And I don't think it strays far from the KISS
principle, especially when you consider how easy it is to adjust the key
level with the action sitting in place on the keybed. Even in the
factory, the extra time and expense spent on key-leveling widgets would
be more than compensated by the decreased regulating time, IMHO.

If Steinway incorporates their own invention into their grands, then
some of the other manufacturers might follow suit. But whatever comes to
pass, there are a lot of used pianos out there that still need the
conventional key-leveling approach and I don't know how useful this post
might be. Tuning pianos does leave the mind free to invent and improve
on this wonderous design.

Tom

Sy Zabrocki wrote:
> 
> List--from Sy Zabrocki   
>  
> Some new high end pianos sell in excess of $50,000. All that cash and
> we still use paper punchings to level keys and set key dip. Wouldn't
> someone eventually consider this to be archiac. Not really saying it
> is, just asking the question.

-- 
Thomas A. Cole, RPT
Santa Cruz, CA
mailto:tcole@cruzio.com