Hitting bottom

Bob, Thanks so much for an incredibly clear explanation of something that has always been a mystery to me DESPITE my course in piano technician's skills 30 years ago! Thank you! AFF

Hi Here is a clip I found that illustrates the action live. Thanks again Bob for your fine article E

thanks everyone. It's a difficult subject to grasp, because, as in the space shuttle, each part, each tolerance, sometimes as small as .001" (that's right--1 thousandth of an inch) can really make a difference. The "jack" -- the part of the action that is the last thing to touch (push) the hammer towards the string, is housed in a flange, that is wood on each side. For it to work right, it has to be just enough below the top of the flange, so that when you run your finger across it, you can feel it being very slightly deeper than the wood around it. We are talking, a depth of 1/2 the thickness of a thin sheet of paper. And all the parts are like this. Every time you adjust one, you have to adjust another, and another, X 88. As far as touch is concerned, and after touch, yes, that can be adjusted, withing certain parameters, which are hopefully withing the artist's liking. Set it outside the boundaries and the whole mechanism has catastrophic failure. Or you won't be able to play fast, or you won't be able to play softly. If you have a good technician, he or she will be able to do wonders with your piano, if he or she knows how. So if you don't like something, don't be afraid to ask them to fix it. with my Estonia, I've had it all over the floor, working on it. Still have a ways to go, but it's coming. The goal is to make it as close to a Hamburg B as I can. It's had a problem for 3 years that I was told was just my hearing. I disagreed. We finally figured out what the problem was most likely caused by. A computer program, just made by piano engineers in Germany, showed that the problem I had been complaing about, was exactly in the range of notes that I said there was a problem. With that information and a new type of piano wire, a single string was changed out and the problem I've been fighting--even for people to just hear, let alone fix--totally disappeared. The computer said the problem was happening at the 15th partial (harmonic) above the fundamental sound at C4. Now my piano sounds warm and wonderful. So again, if you don't like something or you think something is wrong, realize that many of the problems may be characteristic of your piano, but in some cases there is really a problem, even though it seems you are the only one hearing it. In my case, thank goodness for the computer program that validated what I complained about, as being exactly where the piano had a potential for a problem. And the piano string to fix it, has just now come to the market--it's stainless steel, instead of high quality, normal steel. And takes 1 lb. less tension to get to pitch than the other (normal) kind of piano wire. Bob

By the way, how do you guys put a quote in your post so that it says, "Qoute from Alan Fraser" or whoever? I don't know how to do that... 1) Bob wrote earlier: I didn't realize this. I thought that you SHOULD be able to feel that moment half way down when the escapement catches, that it's good when it "catches" slightly. On my Landowska Steinway, which is set up incredibly well (at least, incredibly to my liking), if I depress the key very slowly, much slower than I ever would in playing, I can feel that subtle catch, and this tells me the escapement is working well. 2) In your second post on this thread, Bob, although you do your best to explain it, I am still not totally clear. My basic lack of understanding centers on one thing: how can downweight and upweight be different? If 49 grams does not press the key down but 50 grams does, then how is it possible that once it is down on the keybed, if even only a 22-gram weight is placed on the key, the key will return to the surface? I know that this is a wonderful fact, that this is what makes a piano action "bouncy" or "responsive," but I still don't really know WHY, and I can't see how it could be so. It is clear that equals inertia, that is the combined inertia of the key itself, the hammer that the key is lifting, and perhaps some small resistance from the dampers as well. This is different from , which is the resistance offered by the action itself, depending on leverage ratios etc. But how can upweight be different from downweight? 3) I am very glad to read about this computer program that solved your particular problem, it appears in a way that was not possible even 20 years ago. Might there be hope that our overall ability to build an amazing instrument could one day return to the level of Steinway in its glory days? The more I play it, the more I am convinced that no instrument being built today comes close to the 1942 Steinway B I recently acquired. The workmanship, the quality of the wood itself, God knows what other unknown factors have combined to make me feel like I have a Stradivarius of pianos... And the way the action is set up is one of these factors... All these questions have particular significance for me because next month I go to Miami to complete a couple of projects with Kemal and also to play on the Horowitz Steinway which will be there. Kemal tells me it's actually not such an amazing instrument, that he's played better. One reason for this may be that obviously it is no longer set up to concert regulation, but could it be that Horowitz didn't need an amazing instrument to play the way he did but just one with a particular colour and personality? I hope to learn much from touching this instrument but am also aware that I could be disappointed because of the different way the action is now set up. Cheers, Alan