Hi All, I think that most piano technicians would agree that one of
the most critical and difficult adjustments on the grand action is the
repetition lever spring.  In every book I've ever read on the subject, the
qualifying terms are subjective not objective.  This forces the technician
to interpret those subjective terms which leads to vast differences in the
actual regulation of identical actions from technician to technician.

Case in point.  On page 298 of John Travis's "Let's Tune Up", he uses the
term" decidedly firm, rather than 'jerky,' 'up-kick.'" On page 172 of
William White's" Piano Tuning and Allied Arts", he uses the term,
"slightly rises".

So which is it? Decidedly firm or slightly rises?

I don't know if I mentioned that I started learned about the piano action
at age eleven from books I got from a local library.  After trying to
understand the writing, I gave up and studied the action just like Craig
and others did and referred to the book for terms and the like.
Interestingly enough, it was to be another 14 years before I would meet a
96 year old piano builder that put virtually all of my questions to rest
regarding regulating.  He admitted that it was almost impossible to
convey the actions necessary to do a great job with words alone.  I can
remember his exact words like it was yesterday.  He said, "John, explain
to me what 'raise gently' means to you." I couldn't do it without moving
my hands.  He told me to hold my hands still and try again.  I gave up!
He then said that unless someone SHOWS you what 'raise gently' means in
regards to regulating, you'll most likely never really understand how to
set it correctly.  The owner of the company I was working for, who had
been in the business for more than 40 years had told me that no one was
ever able to adequately explain how to set the spring tension.  His idea
of up-kick was like what you find on the new Yamaha pianos.  They
literally 'jump' up.

My point is very simple.  Without very expensive testing equipment and
the skills necessary to use that equipment, it is, in my opinion,
virtually impossible to gain the skills needed to successfully repair or
rebuild complex musical instruments by reading a book! It just doesn't
work like that.  Only a person with years of "hands-on" experience who
has been properly trained by a master technician/craftsman can begin to
refine the education of an apprentice or novice.  Considering the number
of manufacturers that have come and gone over the past century-and-a-half
and each of their peculiar differences, the importance of "hands-on"
experience AND an experienced technician is absolutely essential if a job
is to be completed successfully _without_ learning from mistakes.

Furthermore, it is my opinion that the major problem lies with our own
language and our limited number of adjectives and verbs.  We simply don't
have enough words to accurately describe the actions that are required in
every case.  Just as an example of what I mean, the Japanese have a
different word for each of the different sounds that rain makes when it
hits something and the force with which it hits that object.  So there is
never any confusion about what the rain is hitting or how hard it's
coming down.  In English, we must describe the situation.  If we simply
say, 'pitter-patter' or 'drip, drip, drip' we can only surmise that the
rain is falling at a slow rate.  But can we tell whether it's a
pitter-patter on a tin roof or a pitter-patter on the sidewalk? No! We
must elaborate by 'adding in' the defining characteristics of the
situation.  Very cumbersome and long-winded.

It has been my understanding for may years that books are to be used as a
reference.  Only an experienced technician can lead a novice through the
thousands of individual actions required to correctly rebuild or maintain
an instrument on the first try.  Converting written words into actions
requires a certain amount of interpretation and reading a book does not
qualify one as an interpreter, no matter who does the writing.

Look at it another way.  Why do we have piano teachers? A six-year old
can learn to read music and play the piano without a teacher.  I know
that from my own experience.  But it takes an experienced teacher to
interpret the music and then convey that interpretation to the student
by _example_ before the student can excel.  The teacher does _not_
communicate _anything_ with words other than to say, "Like this!"

I think that _all_ writers can benefit from understanding this reality:

You _must_, when using subjective terms, relate those terms in ways that
even a child can understand _or_ in actual terms of time, distance and
speed.  In other words, KISS: Keep It Simple Stupid!

Case in point.  When asked about 'up-kick', I use the phrase 'like
dropping a feather'.  I think even a child can relate to that picture.
Or I say, 'you should barely be able to feel it happen under your finger
tips'.  But even here, the term 'feel' is subjective because we all feel
things differently.

What's your opinion, I'd like to hear from you.
•
John A. Tuttle "Self-Playing Pianos"  908-840-8787 (leave message)
407 19th Avenue               http://www.concentric.net/~tuttleja/
Bricktown, NJ 08724                 E-mail:tuttleja@concentric.net
"We Keep Your Music Rolling"      Authorized QRS Music Roll Dealer