GRAND REGULATION – Regulation where the piano is - part IX

Whenever the subject of grand action regulating comes up, the thoughts always turn to benches, key levelers, and let-off racks. As others gloat about how they designed their own bench tops to try to duplicate the piano’s keybed, I usually wander off shaking my head asking myself, why so much bother when they could just use the piano itself? I agree that many of the procedures in the 50-point checklist must be done in the shop. These include such repairs as rebushing keys, refelting the keyframe, replacing keytops, etc.

However, many of the steps that may be done in the shop can also be done at the piano, or at least in the customer’s home. These would include such things as reshaping hammers, repairing action centres, polishing capstans, cleaning knuckles, etc. If the piano is not already in the shop for rebuilding, I much prefer to work right in the customer’s home. I have no need for an elaborate bench top, let-off racks, or Jarvas type key levelers! As a bench, I use the keybed of the piano, or if need be, my lap or the piano’s lid (padded of course with a moving pad). Instead of a let-off rack, I use the strings themselves (far easier and more accurate). In place of a key leveler I use a small straightedge about 15” long which I carry in my case.

Also in my case is a good supply of punchings and other repair items so that I can arrive at a home to tune the piano, and end up staying there all day, reshaping hammers, doing action repairs, and a complete action regulation. I don’t work out of a large van either. In fact, many days I work out of a motorcycle! With experience I know what to bring to be prepared for the day’s troubles. In most cases, the customer would rather that I work on the piano in her home. She can watch what I am doing, the piano is not out of commission any longer than need be, and if any unexpected repairs crop up, l can consult with the owner while at the piano. It is certainly easier on me since I often work many miles from home, and it is awfully hard to carry a grand action home on my motorcycle.

These reasons for working at the piano are secondary. Of real importance is the reduced time to complete the work (which means more money) and greater accuracy. Let us make a comparison of two equally fast working technicians, one who regulates at the piano, the other who carts the action back to the shop. Let’s pick a ten-year-old piano which has had normal usage. All that is needed are the usual minor adjustments to the action as a result of a little wear and settling in of the action parts, reshaping and voicing of the hammers, and tuning.

The first technician, who regulates at the piano, immediately proceeds to reshape the hammers. This can be done by turning the action around in the piano with the hammers facing the technician, or else putting the action on top of the piano. He then takes apart the action, removes the keys, reinstalls the action without the keys, and cleans everything prepatory to bedding the keyframe. After bedding he aligns all of the action parts, using thestrings ofthe piano as his guide. Next, he regulates the action mechanism in the piano, and lastly tunes and voices it. Approximate time: one working day.

The second technician, who is going to regulate the action at his shop, takes the essential measurements of key height, string height, and touch depth. He then carts the action out to his vehicle (trying not to hit anything on the way out and hoping not to drop the action while opening the doors). After the long drive home he carts the action into his shop, clears off a working area on his bench, gets out his letoff rack and key leveler and begins to work. Approximate delay time: 1/2 hour plus the driving time! Another 1/4 hour is spent trying to shim the action so that the key heights and key dip measurements he took in the piano are duplicated on the bench.

This technician also begins by reshaping the hammers (a good place to begin). However, he cannot bed the keyframe as he is not at the piano. Hopefully the keyframe was already bedded correctly as he must now set the key level, adjust the blow, let-off, dip, etc. When this second technician realizes that the hammers and whippens are not aligned, it is too late, as he has already filed the hammers and removed all traces of the string grooves. With nothing to do any aligning with, he completes the regulation process as well as he can. When the action is returned to the piano, he will bed the keyframe and do any aligning there.

He now returns the action to the home. Upon checking the bedding, he finds that the piano was never properly bedded at the factory (the studs were too far down, making the action rock). Upon correcting the bedding of the keyframe he checks the key level. Not only is it off, but the dip is now shallow and the piano won’t even play! Two hours later after releveling the keys and resetting the dip, he checks the blow and letoff. The blow is now off since he had to relevel the keys, and the let-off is too far from the strings (he must have set the let-off rack a little too low).

By the time he has finished, he has had to reregulate the entire action, this time at the piano. Approximate total time spent, is twice as long as the first technician. Now, I realize this may be an extreme case. The second technician could have saved much of the duplication, if he had: 1) made sure that the keyframe was properly bedded to the keybed, 2) levelled the keys at the piano (a must), 3) set sample keys to the correct blow, let-off, drop, dip and back- check before removing the action to his shop, and 4) aligned the hammers to the strings while still in the home.

In taking these precautions, a technician can accurately regulate at the bench. Obviously though, more time must be spent in going back to the shop. Making sure that the keyframe is bedded to the keybed is not always a five-minute procedure. If the piano is like a Steinway where the glide studs are adjusted with a tuning hammer, one can grab hold of these studs and by lifting and tapping do a fairly good job at bedding. But what if the action is like one where the studs barely poke through the keyframe and are adjusted with a screwdriver? You must disassemble the entire action to properly bed this keyframe! If you have to go to that much trouble, why not stay at the home and finish everything there?

Next month we will finally begin Section IV, The Touch portion of the 50 -point checklist. As we talk through the various steps, I will be speaking from the viewpoint of doing everything at the piano, in the home. Even though you do not use this method, I am sure that some helpful hints can be gained.

I remember once asking one of the older, wiser technicians who attended every piano tuners guild meeting that he could, why did he continue to come so often, since he already knew so much? His response has stuck with me ever since: “I try to pick up on something that will help me in my jobs each day. I can usually learn at least one good idea. If not, then I can learn how not to do something so that I won’t have to learn the hard way!“

GRAND REGULATION – part VIII

In part VII of the series on grand regulation we discussed the two methods of regulation for grands, the Dip and Blow Priority. Now that we know the differences between these two methods, two decisions must be made before Section IV ‘The Touch’ can be begun. The first decision is what procedure to use to accomplish the regulation process. The other decision, depending upon which Priority method was chosen, is to determine the correct measurement for the dip or blow. Once these two decisions have been made, the remainder is a piece of cake. Without these two decisions, regulation becomes a long, hard task with lots of wasted time.

Let us look at some of the many grand regulation procedures that are available to choose from. This list is by no means all inclusive, and just because a certain procedure has been omitted from this list does not infer anything about its relative merits and value to us.

The five procedures listed on the left are Dip Priority, the five on the right are Blow Priority. In viewing this chart you will notice that some procedures have more steps than others. But pay more attention to the order in which these steps are listed. For instance, in procedure no10 the whippens are aligned to the knuckles as step number three. But in step number seven the hammers are aligned to the strings, making realignment of the whippens necessary. Other procedures listed have similar mistakes. I would certainly modify the order of some of these procedures to eliminate such needless doubling back.

If you were to regulate an action, which of these procedures would you choose? Should you select the one that is from the factory manual for the brand of piano being worked upon? If so, then each time you regulated a different brand of piano you would use a different procedure! Needless to say, this is awkward. Or should you select a procedure written by your favourite author to use on all brands of pianos? Chances are that your author’s procedure is different from what the manufacturer calls for, and may not be as detailed as the factory manual. As an example, some pianos have an auxiliary whippen spring. If you did not know this, and the procedure you were using doesn’t mention it, you would probably overlook it. Well then, should you select the procedure that is the most detailed? I don’t believe so. Just because it has 125 steps doesn’t mean that it is better than one with 50 steps!

How do you decide upon a procedure? Obviously, you want the one which is easiest and fastest for you. People differ in their abilities and knowledge. What works best for one technician may be awkward for another. I suggest that everyone make up their own procedure to suit their own needs. In creating your own, remember that the order of steps must be logical so that the minimum of doubling back occurs.

As a help here, consult the Grand Regulation Chart which appeared in the 2^nd post of this series on grand regulation. Naturally, you will want to include those steps such as reshaping hammers and rebushing keys that are normally done when regulating an action. Every step should be in a convenient order to go along with how you regulate. Do you bench regulate or do you regulate at the piano, or a little of each? In that case, you have to create your own procedure.

Now that the procedure has been decided upon, next is to decide what measurement to use for the dip or blow. Let us take the example of a Blow Priority method first. In various piano technicians’ manuals you can find many different measurements for blow for a grand piano. Be aware that some of these measurements listed in the piano technicians’ manuals are different from what the manufacturers state in their manuals. Also, be aware that when the pianos are made, the factory may or may not use these specific measurements. One reason why is the varying thicknesses of grand piano plate castings.

Remember that these specifications are for brand new pianos. As an action becomes worn, compromises must be made. It is not feasible to replace a perfectly good set of hammers just because they are starting to get worn! So how does one decide what blow distance to use? All that I can say is to try sample keys, maybe one in each section of the action, and adjust the blow within tolerances to create the correct aftertouch (assuming that the other steps are properly regulated on these sample keys). If the blow distance must be altered beyond tolerances, then maybe the action needs to be repaired or rebuilt before it can be regulated.

Taking now the example of the Dip Priority method, your task is no easier. Many technicians say that the dip should be 3/8”. This measurement is supposed to be valid for all grands. But is it? I have had technicians argue that the key dip should never be altered. Well, believe me, if the dip on a Concert grand is set at 3/8” and the artist complains that the dip is shallow for him, you had better change it! This can often be the case with foreign artists, because they are used to a slightly deeper key dip. A technician who insists upon a 3/8” dip would also run into big problems, if he worked for instance for a Kawai dealer. The Kawai factory manual specifies 10mm (.394”, 3/8 = .375) for their verticals, 10.5mm (.414”) for their 7’4” and smaller grands, and a whopping 11mm (.4334”) for their concert grand!

Just as in selecting the proper blow distance, to select the correct key dip, first start with the measurement specified by the manufacturer. However, if this measurement when tried on sample keys does not conform to either standards or to the liking of the pianist, then by all means, change it. I would far prefer to adjust the blow or dip on a piano to make an artist happy than to alter it in a way that is permanent, such as in voicing. Either the dip or the blow can both be reset easily later, because they both should be changed equally across the keyboard from what they previously were. Simply reverse the procedure used to alter the action, and everything will return back to what it was.

In conclusion, I would like to state some limits within which it would be acceptable to alter the dip and blow. I would never alter the dip much over .025” beyond what the manual specifies for that piano. Likewise, I would never alter the blow over about 1/8” to 3/16” from the factory specifications. Rather than go beyond these limits, I would prefer to replace the hammers, reround the knuckles or replace them, or to repair or replace the whippen cushion felts.