Hi Frank. I would have thought the same until the example given by Gene. Seems to provide a contradiction whereby clearly the weight ratio was the more dependable. Of course we have to await more info from Gene on this... but I'd actually like to get to the bottom of what causes the apparent discrepancy between the two protocols. Stanwood will be the first to acknowledge that ratio taken his way versus a distance ratio will yield different results at least as often as not, if not more so, and he has done some comparative work to find a happy marriage between the two. But I dont think he's seen such an extreme example as Gene's seem to be at the moment. Cheers RicB .....Dale Erwin’s practice of measuring hammer movement for a predetermined key movement is much superior for determining the ratios. This automatically makes allowance for the vertical and horizontal components of movement of every action part. Similarly, calculating the ratio from weights rather than distances returns more accurate values for action ratios. The problem with physical measurements is that it is often difficult to accurately measure, visualize alignment, avoid being deceived by parallax influences, etc..... Frank Emerson
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC