Grand Regulation Compromises

[John Delacour]

At 8:09 AM -0800 11/29/01, Delwin D Fandrich wrote:

>Sigh! How things change with time. Or, perhaps I should say, how our
>perceptions change with time.
>When I started in this business a key travel of 9.5 mm (0.375") was
>considered the norm and Steinway's 10 mm (0.395") was, by many, considered
>some on the deep side.

How old are we Del??  No older than me, for sure, and off hand I can 
think of no grand piano since 1880 that will take a 9.5 mm touch with 
a 48 mm blow and get a clean escapement.  The only piano that has 
such a shallow touch is the Blüthner, which has a patent action and a 
recommended blow of 43 mm.

So far as I know, action design and key ratios have not significantly 
changed in the last 100 years and there are many 19th century pianos, 
grand and upright, that require over 10 mm touch depth.  3/8" has 
never been anything but a theoretical figure and has never allowed 
for escapement.

So far as I'm concerned the touch depth is whatever is required to 
allow the back of the roller (knuckle) to pass clear of the jack on 
the way to check with a 48 mm blow.  If that is too deep for comfort, 
then the blow must be reduced


>Has it occurred to anyone that the pianist might be better off with somewhat
>lighter, more resilient hammers so we could move back toward a more
>realistic key travel?

That's another matter altogether.  I'm sure hammer-makers would be 
delighted if the felt makers would insist on wool from the second 
shearing and use no detergents and get the wool from the right sheep 
and pay attention to fibre length and actually felt the stuff 
properly.  Then they might have the raw materials to set about making 
a proper hammer.  When I started in the trade it was impossible to 
buy a good hammer anywhere and it's not easy now either.

JD