Grand Regulation Compromises

[Tom Servinsky]

Oops, that here, not hear!
Give me a break...it's late!
Tom Servinsky


> Terry,
> I too have to chime in hear.
> Bench regulation, unless set up incredibly well designed keybed simulating
> device, you are increasing the time needed to regulate. You'll quickly
learn
> that having to re-regulate your regulating job will cost you time and
money.
> Actions in the piano will yield different parameters than on a bench,
again,
> that's if you don't have a good simulating device.  Regulating at the
piano,
> all in all, is the way to go. And actually once you get the hang of
> regulating at the piano on site, things go rather smoothly and
predictable.
> There is nothing more frustrating discovering that beautiful key leveling
> you did on the bench become a sloppy tidal wave in the piano.
> Tom Servinsky,RPT
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kjell Sverre Fardal" <ksfardal@online.no>
> To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 5:52 PM
> Subject: SV: Grand Regulation Compromises
>
>
> > Hi, Terry!
> >
> > I have been waiting for someone to comment "bench-regualtion", but it
> seems
> > I have to do it ...;)
> >
> > First of all: I prefer to regulate the grand-action in the piano. This
is
> > the only way I feel I can do the best job. Two reasons for that: a) the
> > keyframe is (in some cases...)fitted to the keybed, and not to my
> > work-bench, and b) I can make decissions on how to regulate by making
> > samples, and then play the piano to see how it worked out.
> >
> > If I have to do a "low-budget-job" (is this the case here?), I prefer to
> > make samples in all sections (filing test-hammers, then doing all
> regulating
> > and testing) before I take the action to my workshop and finish the work
> > there.
> >
> > All these inch-measurements doesn`t tell me very much (I prefer mm !),
but
> > as others have said, I would give key-dip a certain priority (max. 10 mm
> on
> > a small grand), and then make the compromises with blow-distance AND (if

> > nescessary) let-off, to get the aftertouch you want.
> >
> > My motto: "The best action-work is done in bed"    (keybed  :-)
> >
> > Just some thoughts from another Norwegian...
> >
> >
> > Kjell Sverre Fardal, NPTF
> > ksfardal@online.no
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Opprinnelig melding-----
> > Fra: owner-pianotech@ptg.org [mailto:owner-pianotech@ptg.org]På vegne av
> > Farrell
> > Sendt: 28. november 2001 22:38
> > Til: pianotech@ptg.org
> > Emne: Re: Grand Regulation Compromises
> >
> >
> > Thanks Phil, that's the way I am leaning. But not being a player, I
don't
> > have a great feel for how much dip is too much dip. To the best of my
> > knowledge, 0.375" to 0.44" would be the normal range of dip, with most
> > pianos specking out around 0.4". Where do you draw the line on the high
> > side? If I set dip at 0.4", my blow distance will be 1-1/2". If I set
dip
> at
> > 0.44" or 0.45", I can accommodate a blow distance of 1-3/4". But isn't a
> dip
> > of 0.45" a bit much for most players? Does this depend on the size of
> piano?
> > Is it maybe that professional musicians that are capable of taking
control
> > of the keyboard may like a deeper dip of say 0.43", but little Mrs.
> > Playlightly-and-not-too-good-at-that may prefer a more shallow dip???
> >
> > I guess that is what my main question is, where do you draw the line on
> dip
> > in a case like this (spec at 3/8" - who knows why - little crummy
piano -
> no
> > professional musician involved)? Thanks
> >
> > Terry Farrell
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Phil Bondi" <tito@PhilBondi.com>
> > To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 1:03 PM
> > Subject: Re: Grand Regulation Compromises
> >
> >
> > > Terry, I am "Dip Priority"..I've had a few facing me like you
have..you
> > have
> > > to make a compromise somewhere..but I use dip as my priority.
> > >
> > > What has happened to me in the past is you set the blow distance more
> > > shallow to keep the aftertouch and let-off somewhere resembling
> > 'specs'..but
> > > as you know, 'specs' can be somewhat deceiving, too. Use them as a
> guide,
> > > not a rule.
> > >
> > > Listen to me..the voice of experience?!?!?
> > >
> > > Phil
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>