Dale wrote: I thought about doing some experiments by modifying the foot on my gauge to 8 mm. A 6 to 1 ratio with An 8 mm foot will cause 48 mm of hammer rise. In which case the let-off button would need to be screwed up on many actions which is only slightly inconvenient but This modification would take into account more of the hammer travel as Bob suggested. Of course a lower ratio say 5.5 to 1 creates only 44 mm of hammer rise so in most c ases would be very workable. Routinely though action ratios seem to average something like 5.3 to 6.3.Yes, there are anomaly on either side of this.. I think I'll do some comparison testing of a 6 mm & 8 mm foot on the action ratio block & see how much of a difference is had by allowing more of the entire key stroke come into the equation. This may be especially important when diagnosing the angled capstan systems we've been discussing. PS Dale -- how's that Steinway L from Montana coming along? Dale, I'm vitally interested in what you find out there. If you, and others, recall -- I wrote that article on regulating without specs by analyzing action ratios in this manner. I'll be presenting a couple of classes in that in Grand Rapids and I'm planning on making a bunch of those 6 or 8 mmm key depressors for that reason. I want to make a good decision between those two measurements. (heck, maybe I'll make BOTH, and generate more class discussion) BTW, I think it was David Anderson (forgive me, David, if I'm wrong) who said my methods seemed kind of "propeller head-ish", and I LOVED that. Ed Sutton further teased me about recognizing me in the halls by my propeller-head beanie. Welp, I've located them online, the beanies, that is, and I WILL be so attired! Look for me. John Dorr Helena, MT
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC