action ratios

[David Love]

I'm not sure how much you want me to go into it, the point was that the
relatively low ratio demanded regulation specs that were beyond what the
pianist would accept--I would have had to increase the dip substantially.
There were other problems too, namely, she didn't like the tone.  Whether it
was the weight of the hammer or the type of hammer is hard to say.  But the
piano (a Steinway) was converted back to a more conventional design with
higher ratio and 1/2 - 3/4 medium zone hammers (I'd have to look up the
exact specs).  She was happy.  But like everything else being thrown around,
just another story, not a large enough sample to mean much.

David Love


----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Brekne" <Richard.Brekne@grieg.uib.no>
To: "Pianotech" <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: October 31, 2002 3:52 PM
Subject: Re: action ratios


David Love wrote:

>The piano I mentioned above which had a ratio of 5.3 and high zone SW's was
regulated at 10mm dip/44 mm blow.
>It was bobbling all over the place.  The dip required to solve the problem
was
not acceptable to the pianist.


Would you mind going into this in a little more detail ?


--
Richard Brekne
RPT, N.P.T.F.
UiB, Bergen, Norway
mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no
http://home.broadpark.no/~rbrekne/ricmain.html


_______________________________________________
pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives