Pianotech

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

Hi Joe"

If your dip is, by intent, even throughout to careful measure, you have chosen what is called dip priority, where the aftertouch is not a controlled variable and can differ.  If you are doing aftertouch priority, that is your controlled variable, and dip will vary.  I am an aftertouch priority guy, so in an action rebuild I set a quick and dirty dip that is sufficient to make the regulation functional so as do the let off, blow distance, checking height, and so on.  I will revisit the regulation several times before the piano goes out the door, and I want my regulation pretty stable and accurate before I finally set the aftertouch.  In a perfect world, my regulation would be so good that aftertouch and dip would be the same throughout.  But even new parts are variable, small errors in our regulation creep in, and so on.  

What is interesting is that dip is dip. If we set the dip to .390" then, even as the other measure can vary, that setting does not change.  But aftertouch sure can.  When you set the regulation to what you is refined and, say the dip feels too shallow.  You check your measure and its still .390.  But you have little or no aftertouch.  I am just thinking that aftertouch can be a bit of a canary in the coal mine for existing action problems that you have not noted and addressed.  We can quantify our measure for aftertouch, but we often feel the anomoly first.

I think you are overthinking it a bit. Set the letoff as desired and varied through the scale as you prefer, more in the bass, less in the treble.  Set the blow distance to the desired measure.  Make the dip deep enough that you will not have to remove punchings to achieve your 1.25 mm aftertouch.  Whether by a weight or by finger, add or subtract punchings until you just go through letoff and no more.

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

Will, I very much agree. I know I cannot feel the difference of .005" key dip, but consistent aftertouch is probably one of the most important things that makes the piano feel consistent. For myself, I think this is a little more noticeable than key balancing (though certainly important).

Hi Joe"

If your dip is, by intent, even throughout to careful measure, you have chosen what is called dip priority, where the aftertouch is not a controlled variable and can differ.  If you are doing aftertouch priority, that is your controlled variable, and dip will vary.  I am an aftertouch priority guy, so in an action rebuild I set a quick and dirty dip that is sufficient to make the regulation functional so as do the let off, blow distance, checking height, and so on.  I will revisit the regulation several times before the piano goes out the door, and I want my regulation pretty stable and accurate before I finally set the aftertouch.  In a perfect world, my regulation would be so good that aftertouch and dip would be the same throughout.  But even new parts are variable, small errors in our regulation creep in, and so on.  

What is interesting is that dip is dip. If we set the dip to .390" then, even as the other measure can vary, that setting does not change.  But aftertouch sure can.  When you set the regulation to what you is refined and, say the dip feels too shallow.  You check your measure and its still .390.  But you have little or no aftertouch.  I am just thinking that aftertouch can be a bit of a canary in the coal mine for existing action problems that you have not noted and addressed.  We can quantify our measure for aftertouch, but we often feel the anomoly first.

I think you are overthinking it a bit. Set the letoff as desired and varied through the scale as you prefer, more in the bass, less in the treble.  Set the blow distance to the desired measure.  Make the dip deep enough that you will not have to remove punchings to achieve your 1.25 mm aftertouch.  Whether by a weight or by finger, add or subtract punchings until you just go through letoff and no more.

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

There are many others more erudite than me, but I'd point out that what William's canary can indicate, when you think you've accounted for everything, is the jack position at rest that might upset the timing, a step that can't be passed up or just be 'close enough' if you're going to be as exacting as your striving for. That can be properly set; the condition of the knuckles, which often changes across the compass of the keyboard and can effect the let off and is something that might require some negotiation.

Will, I very much agree. I know I cannot feel the difference of .005" key dip, but consistent aftertouch is probably one of the most important things that makes the piano feel consistent. For myself, I think this is a little more noticeable than key balancing (though certainly important).

Hi Joe"

If your dip is, by intent, even throughout to careful measure, you have chosen what is called dip priority, where the aftertouch is not a controlled variable and can differ.  If you are doing aftertouch priority, that is your controlled variable, and dip will vary.  I am an aftertouch priority guy, so in an action rebuild I set a quick and dirty dip that is sufficient to make the regulation functional so as do the let off, blow distance, checking height, and so on.  I will revisit the regulation several times before the piano goes out the door, and I want my regulation pretty stable and accurate before I finally set the aftertouch.  In a perfect world, my regulation would be so good that aftertouch and dip would be the same throughout.  But even new parts are variable, small errors in our regulation creep in, and so on.  

What is interesting is that dip is dip. If we set the dip to .390" then, even as the other measure can vary, that setting does not change.  But aftertouch sure can.  When you set the regulation to what you is refined and, say the dip feels too shallow.  You check your measure and its still .390.  But you have little or no aftertouch.  I am just thinking that aftertouch can be a bit of a canary in the coal mine for existing action problems that you have not noted and addressed.  We can quantify our measure for aftertouch, but we often feel the anomoly first.

I think you are overthinking it a bit. Set the letoff as desired and varied through the scale as you prefer, more in the bass, less in the treble.  Set the blow distance to the desired measure.  Make the dip deep enough that you will not have to remove punchings to achieve your 1.25 mm aftertouch.  Whether by a weight or by finger, add or subtract punchings until you just go through letoff and no more.

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

Others have written about the paramount importance of consistent after-touch. a notion with which I heartily agree.

Of course, if we treat let-off as as sacrosanct (tapered from bass to treble but compromised for nothing from one note to another within a section), the two primary determinants of after-touch are key dip and hammer blow distance.

If one prizes the visual of consistent hammer blow distance, both within a section and throughout the scale of the piano, then in dealing with the inconsistencies in parts and geometry, as has already been noted, complimentary variations in key dip is going to be "where we bury the bodies."

Some pianist/technicians hold key dip as sacrosanct as I hold let-off. If both of those two aspects are held as invariable, that leaves only blow distance as a remedial variable. Globally speaking, if let-off gets closer with each section, and blow distance does as well, then key dip can remain constant (more or less).

Clear as mud?

There are many others more erudite than me, but I'd point out that what William's canary can indicate, when you think you've accounted for everything, is the jack position at rest that might upset the timing, a step that can't be passed up or just be 'close enough' if you're going to be as exacting as your striving for. That can be properly set; the condition of the knuckles, which often changes across the compass of the keyboard and can effect the let off and is something that might require some negotiation.

Will, I very much agree. I know I cannot feel the difference of .005" key dip, but consistent aftertouch is probably one of the most important things that makes the piano feel consistent. For myself, I think this is a little more noticeable than key balancing (though certainly important).

Hi Joe"

If your dip is, by intent, even throughout to careful measure, you have chosen what is called dip priority, where the aftertouch is not a controlled variable and can differ.  If you are doing aftertouch priority, that is your controlled variable, and dip will vary.  I am an aftertouch priority guy, so in an action rebuild I set a quick and dirty dip that is sufficient to make the regulation functional so as do the let off, blow distance, checking height, and so on.  I will revisit the regulation several times before the piano goes out the door, and I want my regulation pretty stable and accurate before I finally set the aftertouch.  In a perfect world, my regulation would be so good that aftertouch and dip would be the same throughout.  But even new parts are variable, small errors in our regulation creep in, and so on.  

What is interesting is that dip is dip. If we set the dip to .390" then, even as the other measure can vary, that setting does not change.  But aftertouch sure can.  When you set the regulation to what you is refined and, say the dip feels too shallow.  You check your measure and its still .390.  But you have little or no aftertouch.  I am just thinking that aftertouch can be a bit of a canary in the coal mine for existing action problems that you have not noted and addressed.  We can quantify our measure for aftertouch, but we often feel the anomoly first.

I think you are overthinking it a bit. Set the letoff as desired and varied through the scale as you prefer, more in the bass, less in the treble.  Set the blow distance to the desired measure.  Make the dip deep enough that you will not have to remove punchings to achieve your 1.25 mm aftertouch.  Whether by a weight or by finger, add or subtract punchings until you just go through letoff and no more.

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

Alan, I got a good chuckle from your post.  Do i have your permission to use your expression "this is where we bury the bodies" when I am explaining dip and aftertouch to my customers?  😁

Will Truitt

Others have written about the paramount importance of consistent after-touch. a notion with which I heartily agree.

Of course, if we treat let-off as as sacrosanct (tapered from bass to treble but compromised for nothing from one note to another within a section), the two primary determinants of after-touch are key dip and hammer blow distance.

If one prizes the visual of consistent hammer blow distance, both within a section and throughout the scale of the piano, then in dealing with the inconsistencies in parts and geometry, as has already been noted, complimentary variations in key dip is going to be "where we bury the bodies."

Some pianist/technicians hold key dip as sacrosanct as I hold let-off. If both of those two aspects are held as invariable, that leaves only blow distance as a remedial variable. Globally speaking, if let-off gets closer with each section, and blow distance does as well, then key dip can remain constant (more or less).

Clear as mud?

There are many others more erudite than me, but I'd point out that what William's canary can indicate, when you think you've accounted for everything, is the jack position at rest that might upset the timing, a step that can't be passed up or just be 'close enough' if you're going to be as exacting as your striving for. That can be properly set; the condition of the knuckles, which often changes across the compass of the keyboard and can effect the let off and is something that might require some negotiation.

Will, I very much agree. I know I cannot feel the difference of .005" key dip, but consistent aftertouch is probably one of the most important things that makes the piano feel consistent. For myself, I think this is a little more noticeable than key balancing (though certainly important).

Hi Joe"

If your dip is, by intent, even throughout to careful measure, you have chosen what is called dip priority, where the aftertouch is not a controlled variable and can differ.  If you are doing aftertouch priority, that is your controlled variable, and dip will vary.  I am an aftertouch priority guy, so in an action rebuild I set a quick and dirty dip that is sufficient to make the regulation functional so as do the let off, blow distance, checking height, and so on.  I will revisit the regulation several times before the piano goes out the door, and I want my regulation pretty stable and accurate before I finally set the aftertouch.  In a perfect world, my regulation would be so good that aftertouch and dip would be the same throughout.  But even new parts are variable, small errors in our regulation creep in, and so on.  

What is interesting is that dip is dip. If we set the dip to .390" then, even as the other measure can vary, that setting does not change.  But aftertouch sure can.  When you set the regulation to what you is refined and, say the dip feels too shallow.  You check your measure and its still .390.  But you have little or no aftertouch.  I am just thinking that aftertouch can be a bit of a canary in the coal mine for existing action problems that you have not noted and addressed.  We can quantify our measure for aftertouch, but we often feel the anomoly first.

I think you are overthinking it a bit. Set the letoff as desired and varied through the scale as you prefer, more in the bass, less in the treble.  Set the blow distance to the desired measure.  Make the dip deep enough that you will not have to remove punchings to achieve your 1.25 mm aftertouch.  Whether by a weight or by finger, add or subtract punchings until you just go through letoff and no more.

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

Others have written about the paramount importance of consistent after-touch. a notion with which I heartily agree.

Of course, if we treat let-off as as sacrosanct (tapered from bass to treble but compromised for nothing from one note to another within a section), the two primary determinants of after-touch are key dip and hammer blow distance.

If one prizes the visual of consistent hammer blow distance, both within a section and throughout the scale of the piano, then in dealing with the inconsistencies in parts and geometry, as has already been noted, complimentary variations in key dip is going to be "where we bury the bodies."

Some pianist/technicians hold key dip as sacrosanct as I hold let-off. If both of those two aspects are held as invariable, that leaves only blow distance as a remedial variable. Globally speaking, if let-off gets closer with each section, and blow distance does as well, then key dip can remain constant (more or less).

Clear as mud?

There are many others more erudite than me, but I'd point out that what William's canary can indicate, when you think you've accounted for everything, is the jack position at rest that might upset the timing, a step that can't be passed up or just be 'close enough' if you're going to be as exacting as your striving for. That can be properly set; the condition of the knuckles, which often changes across the compass of the keyboard and can effect the let off and is something that might require some negotiation.

Will, I very much agree. I know I cannot feel the difference of .005" key dip, but consistent aftertouch is probably one of the most important things that makes the piano feel consistent. For myself, I think this is a little more noticeable than key balancing (though certainly important).

Hi Joe"

If your dip is, by intent, even throughout to careful measure, you have chosen what is called dip priority, where the aftertouch is not a controlled variable and can differ.  If you are doing aftertouch priority, that is your controlled variable, and dip will vary.  I am an aftertouch priority guy, so in an action rebuild I set a quick and dirty dip that is sufficient to make the regulation functional so as do the let off, blow distance, checking height, and so on.  I will revisit the regulation several times before the piano goes out the door, and I want my regulation pretty stable and accurate before I finally set the aftertouch.  In a perfect world, my regulation would be so good that aftertouch and dip would be the same throughout.  But even new parts are variable, small errors in our regulation creep in, and so on.  

What is interesting is that dip is dip. If we set the dip to .390" then, even as the other measure can vary, that setting does not change.  But aftertouch sure can.  When you set the regulation to what you is refined and, say the dip feels too shallow.  You check your measure and its still .390.  But you have little or no aftertouch.  I am just thinking that aftertouch can be a bit of a canary in the coal mine for existing action problems that you have not noted and addressed.  We can quantify our measure for aftertouch, but we often feel the anomoly first.

I think you are overthinking it a bit. Set the letoff as desired and varied through the scale as you prefer, more in the bass, less in the treble.  Set the blow distance to the desired measure.  Make the dip deep enough that you will not have to remove punchings to achieve your 1.25 mm aftertouch.  Whether by a weight or by finger, add or subtract punchings until you just go through letoff and no more.

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

Others have written about the paramount importance of consistent after-touch. a notion with which I heartily agree.

Of course, if we treat let-off as as sacrosanct (tapered from bass to treble but compromised for nothing from one note to another within a section), the two primary determinants of after-touch are key dip and hammer blow distance.

If one prizes the visual of consistent hammer blow distance, both within a section and throughout the scale of the piano, then in dealing with the inconsistencies in parts and geometry, as has already been noted, complimentary variations in key dip is going to be "where we bury the bodies."

Some pianist/technicians hold key dip as sacrosanct as I hold let-off. If both of those two aspects are held as invariable, that leaves only blow distance as a remedial variable. Globally speaking, if let-off gets closer with each section, and blow distance does as well, then key dip can remain constant (more or less).

Clear as mud?

There are many others more erudite than me, but I'd point out that what William's canary can indicate, when you think you've accounted for everything, is the jack position at rest that might upset the timing, a step that can't be passed up or just be 'close enough' if you're going to be as exacting as your striving for. That can be properly set; the condition of the knuckles, which often changes across the compass of the keyboard and can effect the let off and is something that might require some negotiation.

Will, I very much agree. I know I cannot feel the difference of .005" key dip, but consistent aftertouch is probably one of the most important things that makes the piano feel consistent. For myself, I think this is a little more noticeable than key balancing (though certainly important).

Hi Joe"

If your dip is, by intent, even throughout to careful measure, you have chosen what is called dip priority, where the aftertouch is not a controlled variable and can differ.  If you are doing aftertouch priority, that is your controlled variable, and dip will vary.  I am an aftertouch priority guy, so in an action rebuild I set a quick and dirty dip that is sufficient to make the regulation functional so as do the let off, blow distance, checking height, and so on.  I will revisit the regulation several times before the piano goes out the door, and I want my regulation pretty stable and accurate before I finally set the aftertouch.  In a perfect world, my regulation would be so good that aftertouch and dip would be the same throughout.  But even new parts are variable, small errors in our regulation creep in, and so on.  

What is interesting is that dip is dip. If we set the dip to .390" then, even as the other measure can vary, that setting does not change.  But aftertouch sure can.  When you set the regulation to what you is refined and, say the dip feels too shallow.  You check your measure and its still .390.  But you have little or no aftertouch.  I am just thinking that aftertouch can be a bit of a canary in the coal mine for existing action problems that you have not noted and addressed.  We can quantify our measure for aftertouch, but we often feel the anomoly first.

I think you are overthinking it a bit. Set the letoff as desired and varied through the scale as you prefer, more in the bass, less in the treble.  Set the blow distance to the desired measure.  Make the dip deep enough that you will not have to remove punchings to achieve your 1.25 mm aftertouch.  Whether by a weight or by finger, add or subtract punchings until you just go through letoff and no more.

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

Richard,

Concerning the Yamaha technique for assessing after-touch with no tools external to our bodies, Richard Davenport, RPT reported from his experience at the Yamaha concert grand factory that he was told that one of the reasons they use both hands is in order to engage both sides of the brain. And as to why close one's eyes while making this assessment, same reason as closing eyes while tuning, or listening to music, for that matter: we are such visual animals that when we close our eyes, we focus much more on what our other senses are telling us.

Best,

Alan

Others have written about the paramount importance of consistent after-touch. a notion with which I heartily agree.

Of course, if we treat let-off as as sacrosanct (tapered from bass to treble but compromised for nothing from one note to another within a section), the two primary determinants of after-touch are key dip and hammer blow distance.

If one prizes the visual of consistent hammer blow distance, both within a section and throughout the scale of the piano, then in dealing with the inconsistencies in parts and geometry, as has already been noted, complimentary variations in key dip is going to be "where we bury the bodies."

Some pianist/technicians hold key dip as sacrosanct as I hold let-off. If both of those two aspects are held as invariable, that leaves only blow distance as a remedial variable. Globally speaking, if let-off gets closer with each section, and blow distance does as well, then key dip can remain constant (more or less).

Clear as mud?

There are many others more erudite than me, but I'd point out that what William's canary can indicate, when you think you've accounted for everything, is the jack position at rest that might upset the timing, a step that can't be passed up or just be 'close enough' if you're going to be as exacting as your striving for. That can be properly set; the condition of the knuckles, which often changes across the compass of the keyboard and can effect the let off and is something that might require some negotiation.

Will, I very much agree. I know I cannot feel the difference of .005" key dip, but consistent aftertouch is probably one of the most important things that makes the piano feel consistent. For myself, I think this is a little more noticeable than key balancing (though certainly important).

Hi Joe"

If your dip is, by intent, even throughout to careful measure, you have chosen what is called dip priority, where the aftertouch is not a controlled variable and can differ.  If you are doing aftertouch priority, that is your controlled variable, and dip will vary.  I am an aftertouch priority guy, so in an action rebuild I set a quick and dirty dip that is sufficient to make the regulation functional so as do the let off, blow distance, checking height, and so on.  I will revisit the regulation several times before the piano goes out the door, and I want my regulation pretty stable and accurate before I finally set the aftertouch.  In a perfect world, my regulation would be so good that aftertouch and dip would be the same throughout.  But even new parts are variable, small errors in our regulation creep in, and so on.  

What is interesting is that dip is dip. If we set the dip to .390" then, even as the other measure can vary, that setting does not change.  But aftertouch sure can.  When you set the regulation to what you is refined and, say the dip feels too shallow.  You check your measure and its still .390.  But you have little or no aftertouch.  I am just thinking that aftertouch can be a bit of a canary in the coal mine for existing action problems that you have not noted and addressed.  We can quantify our measure for aftertouch, but we often feel the anomoly first.

I think you are overthinking it a bit. Set the letoff as desired and varied through the scale as you prefer, more in the bass, less in the treble.  Set the blow distance to the desired measure.  Make the dip deep enough that you will not have to remove punchings to achieve your 1.25 mm aftertouch.  Whether by a weight or by finger, add or subtract punchings until you just go through letoff and no more.

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

Richard,

Concerning the Yamaha technique for assessing after-touch with no tools external to our bodies, Richard Davenport, RPT reported from his experience at the Yamaha concert grand factory that he was told that one of the reasons they use both hands is in order to engage both sides of the brain. And as to why close one's eyes while making this assessment, same reason as closing eyes while tuning, or listening to music, for that matter: we are such visual animals that when we close our eyes, we focus much more on what our other senses are telling us.

Best,

Alan

Others have written about the paramount importance of consistent after-touch. a notion with which I heartily agree.

Of course, if we treat let-off as as sacrosanct (tapered from bass to treble but compromised for nothing from one note to another within a section), the two primary determinants of after-touch are key dip and hammer blow distance.

If one prizes the visual of consistent hammer blow distance, both within a section and throughout the scale of the piano, then in dealing with the inconsistencies in parts and geometry, as has already been noted, complimentary variations in key dip is going to be "where we bury the bodies."

Some pianist/technicians hold key dip as sacrosanct as I hold let-off. If both of those two aspects are held as invariable, that leaves only blow distance as a remedial variable. Globally speaking, if let-off gets closer with each section, and blow distance does as well, then key dip can remain constant (more or less).

Clear as mud?

There are many others more erudite than me, but I'd point out that what William's canary can indicate, when you think you've accounted for everything, is the jack position at rest that might upset the timing, a step that can't be passed up or just be 'close enough' if you're going to be as exacting as your striving for. That can be properly set; the condition of the knuckles, which often changes across the compass of the keyboard and can effect the let off and is something that might require some negotiation.

Will, I very much agree. I know I cannot feel the difference of .005" key dip, but consistent aftertouch is probably one of the most important things that makes the piano feel consistent. For myself, I think this is a little more noticeable than key balancing (though certainly important).

Hi Joe"

If your dip is, by intent, even throughout to careful measure, you have chosen what is called dip priority, where the aftertouch is not a controlled variable and can differ.  If you are doing aftertouch priority, that is your controlled variable, and dip will vary.  I am an aftertouch priority guy, so in an action rebuild I set a quick and dirty dip that is sufficient to make the regulation functional so as do the let off, blow distance, checking height, and so on.  I will revisit the regulation several times before the piano goes out the door, and I want my regulation pretty stable and accurate before I finally set the aftertouch.  In a perfect world, my regulation would be so good that aftertouch and dip would be the same throughout.  But even new parts are variable, small errors in our regulation creep in, and so on.  

What is interesting is that dip is dip. If we set the dip to .390" then, even as the other measure can vary, that setting does not change.  But aftertouch sure can.  When you set the regulation to what you is refined and, say the dip feels too shallow.  You check your measure and its still .390.  But you have little or no aftertouch.  I am just thinking that aftertouch can be a bit of a canary in the coal mine for existing action problems that you have not noted and addressed.  We can quantify our measure for aftertouch, but we often feel the anomoly first.

I think you are overthinking it a bit. Set the letoff as desired and varied through the scale as you prefer, more in the bass, less in the treble.  Set the blow distance to the desired measure.  Make the dip deep enough that you will not have to remove punchings to achieve your 1.25 mm aftertouch.  Whether by a weight or by finger, add or subtract punchings until you just go through letoff and no more.

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 1/28/2026 9:49:00 AM
From: Alan Eder
Subject: RE: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

Richard,

Concerning the Yamaha technique for assessing after-touch with no tools external to our bodies, Richard Davenport, RPT reported from his experience at the Yamaha concert grand factory that he was told that one of the reasons they use both hands is in order to engage both sides of the brain. And as to why close one's eyes while making this assessment, same reason as closing eyes while tuning, or listening to music, for that matter: we are such visual animals that when we close our eyes, we focus much more on what our other senses are telling us.

Best,

Alan

------------------------------
Alan Eder, RPT
Herb Alpert School of Music
California Institute of the Arts
Valencia, CA
661.904.6483

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2026 12:00
From: Richard West
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

Original Message:
Sent: 1/20/2026 10:03:00 AM
From: Alan Eder
Subject: RE: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

Others have written about the paramount importance of consistent after-touch. a notion with which I heartily agree.

Of course, if we treat let-off as as sacrosanct (tapered from bass to treble but compromised for nothing from one note to another within a section), the two primary determinants of after-touch are key dip and hammer blow distance.

If one prizes the visual of consistent hammer blow distance, both within a section and throughout the scale of the piano, then in dealing with the inconsistencies in parts and geometry, as has already been noted, complimentary variations in key dip is going to be "where we bury the bodies."

Some pianist/technicians hold key dip as sacrosanct as I hold let-off. If both of those two aspects are held as invariable, that leaves only blow distance as a remedial variable. Globally speaking, if let-off gets closer with each section, and blow distance does as well, then key dip can remain constant (more or less).

Clear as mud?

------------------------------
Alan Eder, RPT
Herb Alpert School of Music
California Institute of the Arts
Valencia, CA
661.904.6483

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2026 01:09
From: Steven Rosenthal
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

There are many others more erudite than me, but I'd point out that what William's canary can indicate, when you think you've accounted for everything, is the jack position at rest that might upset the timing, a step that can't be passed up or just be 'close enough' if you're going to be as exacting as your striving for. That can be properly set; the condition of the knuckles, which often changes across the compass of the keyboard and can effect the let off and is something that might require some negotiation.

------------------------------
Steven Rosenthal RPT
Honolulu HI
(808) 521-7129

Original Message:
Sent: 01-19-2026 23:14
From: Tim Foster
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

Will, I very much agree. I know I cannot feel the difference of .005" key dip, but consistent aftertouch is probably one of the most important things that makes the piano feel consistent. For myself, I think this is a little more noticeable than key balancing (though certainly important).

------------------------------
Tim Foster RPT
New Oxford PA
(470) 231-6074

Original Message:
Sent: 01-19-2026 20:14
From: William Truitt
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

Hi Joe"

If your dip is, by intent, even throughout to careful measure, you have chosen what is called dip priority, where the aftertouch is not a controlled variable and can differ.  If you are doing aftertouch priority, that is your controlled variable, and dip will vary.  I am an aftertouch priority guy, so in an action rebuild I set a quick and dirty dip that is sufficient to make the regulation functional so as do the let off, blow distance, checking height, and so on.  I will revisit the regulation several times before the piano goes out the door, and I want my regulation pretty stable and accurate before I finally set the aftertouch.  In a perfect world, my regulation would be so good that aftertouch and dip would be the same throughout.  But even new parts are variable, small errors in our regulation creep in, and so on.  

What is interesting is that dip is dip. If we set the dip to .390" then, even as the other measure can vary, that setting does not change.  But aftertouch sure can.  When you set the regulation to what you is refined and, say the dip feels too shallow.  You check your measure and its still .390.  But you have little or no aftertouch.  I am just thinking that aftertouch can be a bit of a canary in the coal mine for existing action problems that you have not noted and addressed.  We can quantify our measure for aftertouch, but we often feel the anomoly first.

I think you are overthinking it a bit. Set the letoff as desired and varied through the scale as you prefer, more in the bass, less in the treble.  Set the blow distance to the desired measure.  Make the dip deep enough that you will not have to remove punchings to achieve your 1.25 mm aftertouch.  Whether by a weight or by finger, add or subtract punchings until you just go through letoff and no more.

------------------------------
William Truitt RPT
Bridgewater NH
(603) 744-2277

Original Message:
Sent: 01-19-2026 19:09
From: Joseph Burros
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

Focusing on refining one aspect of an item that is full of interconnected parts seems diversionary. I've never had a pianist complain about aftertouch or let-off. But when keydip is not to their liking they will comment on that. Everything else is just "it don't feel right" or it's too heavy (or light). And that is the main criteria for me, making sure the customer is happy.

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

Hi Chris, Thanks for your response. Would you say that you regulate a grand piano using a Dip Priority approach, or is your method different from that? Thanks!

Focusing on refining one aspect of an item that is full of interconnected parts seems diversionary. I've never had a pianist complain about aftertouch or let-off. But when keydip is not to their liking they will comment on that. Everything else is just "it don't feel right" or it's too heavy (or light). And that is the main criteria for me, making sure the customer is happy.

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

That's too much aftertouch (.049").  

I always set aftertouch last and usually .030.  I do this with a punching of the same thickness, insert under the key and add or subtract punchings until the hammer just lets off with little pressure on the key at the bottom of the stroke (without front punching compression). 

Aftertouch is a requirement to insure jack escapement from the knuckle. It's not a distance that pianists will necessarily feel.  What they will feel is the consequence of too little (hammer bobbling) or too much (excessive key dip--perhaps).  I aim for uniform aftertouch. The formula is quite simple.  Too much and pianists will have a harder time controlling pianissimo as the hammer may not get close enough to the string on ppp blows.  Too little let-off and you risk double striking.  If you want to set uniform key dip, that's fine, but then to get uniform aftertouch you will have to vary the blow distance.  I'm ok with that, within reason.  

Pianists (many) are sensitive to key dip and so the absolute value and uniformity, without being excessive, is important.  Many who are obsessed with low inertia actions can run into difficulty because if they are achieving that largely through low action ratios they will have to have deeper key dip.  That can be a problem.  On the other hand, if you want a low inertia but also want heavier hammers, you will be stuck with deeper key dip or shorter blow distance. 

Sometimes you have to make compromises somewhere if the pianist is focusing on a specific regulation spec. Recall that the standard for key dip has changed as action ratios have gotten lower.  Someone used to a 9 mm key dip might be troubled by 10 mm which is more the current standard (probably 10-10.5 mm).

The reality is you will almost always have to compromise something to get the specs you want because everything you do affects other things.  Action ratios are the primary determinant of how the action can be regulated.  I would say let-off is not compromisable for reasons given.  Action ratios are determined by the set up of the action.  Blow distance, key dip, aftertouch can all be modified to achieve what is the most important for your pianist. Sometimes you will be altering more than one of those.  But you have to pay the piper somewhere.  

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

Will Truitt: Thanks for detailing your procedure. It makes sense to me and I will try it.

Alan Eder: Your phrase "where we bury the bodies", perfectly sums up where we need to make up for inconsistencies in action parts.

Richard West: Thanks for the Leroy Edwards technique. I just tried it and yes, using the index finger on both hands at the same time enables me to feel much more information and have more control over the key stroke than using only one finger. Did he ever write up an article about this?

David Love: Thanks for your input. I have done a bit of research on the amount of Aftertouch that well-known technicians use, and yes, the Aftertouch amount I have chosen is on the higher side. Perhaps I should lower it. Below is a list of the Aftertouch used by well-known techs. The Aftertouch they use may be different now as some of the references I used are from older publications. Your Aftertouch of .030" is on the lower side of the list below. What has led you to decide on the .030" amount? Did you set Aftertouch higher in the past, and if so, what was the feedback from customers who were advanced players? Thanks!

Aftertouch Preferences of Various Technicians

Steinway Aftertouch Spec: .031-.046"

Nick Gravagne: .049"

Dale Erwin: .040

David Anderson: Never over .059", Aftertouch should be crisp & precise.

Stephen Brady: .055

Mario Igrec: .040"

Jim Ialeggio: .040-.050"

And this is interesting: Ed Foote will allow a .008" variation in key dip before he raises or lowers the hammer to achieve the consistent Aftertouch.

That's too much aftertouch (.049").  

I always set aftertouch last and usually .030.  I do this with a punching of the same thickness, insert under the key and add or subtract punchings until the hammer just lets off with little pressure on the key at the bottom of the stroke (without front punching compression). 

Aftertouch is a requirement to insure jack escapement from the knuckle. It's not a distance that pianists will necessarily feel.  What they will feel is the consequence of too little (hammer bobbling) or too much (excessive key dip--perhaps).  I aim for uniform aftertouch. The formula is quite simple.  Too much and pianists will have a harder time controlling pianissimo as the hammer may not get close enough to the string on ppp blows.  Too little let-off and you risk double striking.  If you want to set uniform key dip, that's fine, but then to get uniform aftertouch you will have to vary the blow distance.  I'm ok with that, within reason.  

Pianists (many) are sensitive to key dip and so the absolute value and uniformity, without being excessive, is important.  Many who are obsessed with low inertia actions can run into difficulty because if they are achieving that largely through low action ratios they will have to have deeper key dip.  That can be a problem.  On the other hand, if you want a low inertia but also want heavier hammers, you will be stuck with deeper key dip or shorter blow distance. 

Sometimes you have to make compromises somewhere if the pianist is focusing on a specific regulation spec. Recall that the standard for key dip has changed as action ratios have gotten lower.  Someone used to a 9 mm key dip might be troubled by 10 mm which is more the current standard (probably 10-10.5 mm).

The reality is you will almost always have to compromise something to get the specs you want because everything you do affects other things.  Action ratios are the primary determinant of how the action can be regulated.  I would say let-off is not compromisable for reasons given.  Action ratios are determined by the set up of the action.  Blow distance, key dip, aftertouch can all be modified to achieve what is the most important for your pianist. Sometimes you will be altering more than one of those.  But you have to pay the piper somewhere.  

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

Joe:

I used to set AT at .040", same method.  I've reduced it to .030" over the years basically because AT is necessary for jack clearance from the knuckle (or hammer butt in an upright), that's its main purpose.  Once the jack has cleared, any additional travel is wasted, accomplishes nothing.  I haven't found .030" to be a problem though you do have to be accurate with jack/knuckle alignment and you will have to stay on top of blow distance changes that can occur over time.  I would imagine some people set some extra AT to compensate for inevitable blow distance increases that come with age which will reduce the AT.  I try and stay on top of that. 

I'm curious where you got your figures from.  Steinway specs I would concur with, but that's likely based on ARs that vary tremendously on vintage v modern Steinways.  Since David Anderson can't speak for himself here, I'll skip that one but .059" seem very excessive to me and he seems to suggest that's a maximum not a target.  Likewise, Stephen Brady's .055" would be more than I would set.  If accurate, then I'm sure they have their reasons.  I've never spoken to Nick G about his choice of AT so not sure where his .049"comes from.  However, the Renner AR formula AR = (Blow Distance - Let-off)/(Key dip - AT) might be the source of that since Nick did a lot of Renner Academy teaching.  Doing the algebra to isolate AT, AT = (Key Dip - Blow Distance - Let-off)/AR, if I did that right.   It's possible that given the other standard Renner specs that comes out to .049 for a given AR.  But as you can see, a changing AR will change the AT.  It does suggest that AT is a number which can change, obviously, depending on the other specs.  If you hold Blow, Let-off and Dip constant, then AT will change as a function of AR.  While I do tend to hold Let-off and AT constant generally--there are always exceptions--I will allow Blow and Dip to float when required by different ARs.  On a given piano I do want the dip to be constant across they keyboard.  I have many pianists who are sensitive to dip which is too deep (11 mm for anyone I know would be unacceptable--fingers just get buried in the keyboard). Of course, we're talking about subtle shifts not radical ones.  Dale Erwin's, Mario Igrec's and Jim Ialeggio's njumbers around .040" is fairly standard, I would have no problem there.  Ed Foote, last time he posted something about it, was using .040" as well.  

Just to restate, pianists have never given me feedback about aftertouch or blow.  I do get feedback about the consequences of inaccurately set let-off, though most pianists would not be able to explain what the problem is, and dip, as I mentioned.  I do not find that small changes in blow make significant differences in power,  though there is obviously some due to increased or reduced hammer velocity.   Most pianists, sadly, don't have any idea what these terms mean.  I do spend a lot of time explaining to them how the piano works and, honestly, the older and more crotchety I get, the less patience I have for a pianist who spends 5 - 6 hours practicing and doesn't understand even remotely how the piano works (or how to extract a pencil for that matter).  But that's just me.  

Re David Skolnick's comments about the white Wurzen punchings, they are firm and so do give a better definition at the bottom.  But precise definition for this is a trade-off for feel at the bottom of the key stroke.  As a pianist, I find them too hard.  Hurts my fingers.  I think those firm Wurzen punchings are mostly for the benefit of our trade's predominantly type A personalities that like precision without guesswork or requirements of feel and judgement in measurement, not for pianists who actually have to play the piano.  I've tried them, and I've removed them for pianists who claim they hurt their fingers.  I agree with that.  They do make nice blocking felt for trapwork and pedals though.  

As far as David S's question about the minimum, you can get away with less but it depends a lot on how the pianist plays. Pianists who play consistently "deep" into the keys may not have a problem. But since playing the piano requires all kinds of touch, deeper and shallower, I would be uncomfortable going less than .030" and, I might add, at .030" I want clear escapement, no knuckles slowly sliding out from under the jack.  You certainly want enough that you don't have any bobbling hammers with light touch.  Perhaps that what David Anderson meant.  

Will Truitt: Thanks for detailing your procedure. It makes sense to me and I will try it.

Alan Eder: Your phrase "where we bury the bodies", perfectly sums up where we need to make up for inconsistencies in action parts.

Richard West: Thanks for the Leroy Edwards technique. I just tried it and yes, using the index finger on both hands at the same time enables me to feel much more information and have more control over the key stroke than using only one finger. Did he ever write up an article about this?

David Love: Thanks for your input. I have done a bit of research on the amount of Aftertouch that well-known technicians use, and yes, the Aftertouch amount I have chosen is on the higher side. Perhaps I should lower it. Below is a list of the Aftertouch used by well-known techs. The Aftertouch they use may be different now as some of the references I used are from older publications. Your Aftertouch of .030" is on the lower side of the list below. What has led you to decide on the .030" amount? Did you set Aftertouch higher in the past, and if so, what was the feedback from customers who were advanced players? Thanks!

Aftertouch Preferences of Various Technicians

Steinway Aftertouch Spec: .031-.046"

Nick Gravagne: .049"

Dale Erwin: .040

David Anderson: Never over .059", Aftertouch should be crisp & precise.

Stephen Brady: .055

Mario Igrec: .040"

Jim Ialeggio: .040-.050"

And this is interesting: Ed Foote will allow a .008" variation in key dip before he raises or lowers the hammer to achieve the consistent Aftertouch.

That's too much aftertouch (.049").  

I always set aftertouch last and usually .030.  I do this with a punching of the same thickness, insert under the key and add or subtract punchings until the hammer just lets off with little pressure on the key at the bottom of the stroke (without front punching compression). 

Aftertouch is a requirement to insure jack escapement from the knuckle. It's not a distance that pianists will necessarily feel.  What they will feel is the consequence of too little (hammer bobbling) or too much (excessive key dip--perhaps).  I aim for uniform aftertouch. The formula is quite simple.  Too much and pianists will have a harder time controlling pianissimo as the hammer may not get close enough to the string on ppp blows.  Too little let-off and you risk double striking.  If you want to set uniform key dip, that's fine, but then to get uniform aftertouch you will have to vary the blow distance.  I'm ok with that, within reason.  

Pianists (many) are sensitive to key dip and so the absolute value and uniformity, without being excessive, is important.  Many who are obsessed with low inertia actions can run into difficulty because if they are achieving that largely through low action ratios they will have to have deeper key dip.  That can be a problem.  On the other hand, if you want a low inertia but also want heavier hammers, you will be stuck with deeper key dip or shorter blow distance. 

Sometimes you have to make compromises somewhere if the pianist is focusing on a specific regulation spec. Recall that the standard for key dip has changed as action ratios have gotten lower.  Someone used to a 9 mm key dip might be troubled by 10 mm which is more the current standard (probably 10-10.5 mm).

The reality is you will almost always have to compromise something to get the specs you want because everything you do affects other things.  Action ratios are the primary determinant of how the action can be regulated.  I would say let-off is not compromisable for reasons given.  Action ratios are determined by the set up of the action.  Blow distance, key dip, aftertouch can all be modified to achieve what is the most important for your pianist. Sometimes you will be altering more than one of those.  But you have to pay the piper somewhere.  

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

That's too much aftertouch (.049").  

I always set aftertouch last and usually .030.  I do this with a punching of the same thickness, insert under the key and add or subtract punchings until the hammer just lets off with little pressure on the key at the bottom of the stroke (without front punching compression). 

Aftertouch is a requirement to insure jack escapement from the knuckle. It's not a distance that pianists will necessarily feel.  What they will feel is the consequence of too little (hammer bobbling) or too much (excessive key dip--perhaps).  I aim for uniform aftertouch. The formula is quite simple.  Too much and pianists will have a harder time controlling pianissimo as the hammer may not get close enough to the string on ppp blows.  Too little let-off and you risk double striking.  If you want to set uniform key dip, that's fine, but then to get uniform aftertouch you will have to vary the blow distance.  I'm ok with that, within reason.  

Pianists (many) are sensitive to key dip and so the absolute value and uniformity, without being excessive, is important.  Many who are obsessed with low inertia actions can run into difficulty because if they are achieving that largely through low action ratios they will have to have deeper key dip.  That can be a problem.  On the other hand, if you want a low inertia but also want heavier hammers, you will be stuck with deeper key dip or shorter blow distance. 

Sometimes you have to make compromises somewhere if the pianist is focusing on a specific regulation spec. Recall that the standard for key dip has changed as action ratios have gotten lower.  Someone used to a 9 mm key dip might be troubled by 10 mm which is more the current standard (probably 10-10.5 mm).

The reality is you will almost always have to compromise something to get the specs you want because everything you do affects other things.  Action ratios are the primary determinant of how the action can be regulated.  I would say let-off is not compromisable for reasons given.  Action ratios are determined by the set up of the action.  Blow distance, key dip, aftertouch can all be modified to achieve what is the most important for your pianist. Sometimes you will be altering more than one of those.  But you have to pay the piper somewhere.  

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

(note: this may be superceded by information in Joe Burros last post, but...)

"Paying the piper" is a much safer framing than "burying the bodies".
I've used David L's method of measuring aftertouch for long enough that I thought that I had come up with it on my own, but that rarely happens in real life.    I DID introduce my own obsessiveness into the process by challenging my self to determine where 'escapement' actually begins and ends.  One determinant would be, as Steven Rosenthal referenced, the fore and aft position of the jack relative to the knuckle.  Another would be the diameter (and intact profile) of the knuckle itself.  David L refered to avoiding front punching compression, but, even if not actually employed in the action itself, I found it much more revealing to use the white hammer felt front punchings (was PianoForte... don't know if Dale still has them) to totally eliminate the compression variable.  Aftertouch, as a discrete measurement, would begin at the end of escapement.
But no, that wasn't enough for me.  I wanted to know how much less than .030" would still permit escapement to happen, so I worked backwards, building back up from the .030" until I could see the effect, not of Richard's .010" (unless that's not what he meant) but of a balance paper .001" or .002".   The point was not how it would feel to a pianist, but how precise/consistent we can be in defining the measurements we quote.   What does it mean if one tech's .030" is another's .025 or .035?   

Additional things to overthink:
- aside from string envelope, what are the constraints of let-off proximity?  
- what is the envelope of let-off effectiveness? iow, how far from string before response is noticeably compromised?
- if increasing letoff distance, are we more concerned about the loss of pianissimo control or of power?
- do we fine-tune our blow distance/hammer line when we've adjusted our bore distances to irregular string levels, or do we use a compromise hammer line? 

That's too much aftertouch (.049").  

I always set aftertouch last and usually .030.  I do this with a punching of the same thickness, insert under the key and add or subtract punchings until the hammer just lets off with little pressure on the key at the bottom of the stroke (without front punching compression). 

Aftertouch is a requirement to insure jack escapement from the knuckle. It's not a distance that pianists will necessarily feel.  What they will feel is the consequence of too little (hammer bobbling) or too much (excessive key dip--perhaps).  I aim for uniform aftertouch. The formula is quite simple.  Too much and pianists will have a harder time controlling pianissimo as the hammer may not get close enough to the string on ppp blows.  Too little let-off and you risk double striking.  If you want to set uniform key dip, that's fine, but then to get uniform aftertouch you will have to vary the blow distance.  I'm ok with that, within reason.  

Pianists (many) are sensitive to key dip and so the absolute value and uniformity, without being excessive, is important.  Many who are obsessed with low inertia actions can run into difficulty because if they are achieving that largely through low action ratios they will have to have deeper key dip.  That can be a problem.  On the other hand, if you want a low inertia but also want heavier hammers, you will be stuck with deeper key dip or shorter blow distance. 

Sometimes you have to make compromises somewhere if the pianist is focusing on a specific regulation spec. Recall that the standard for key dip has changed as action ratios have gotten lower.  Someone used to a 9 mm key dip might be troubled by 10 mm which is more the current standard (probably 10-10.5 mm).

The reality is you will almost always have to compromise something to get the specs you want because everything you do affects other things.  Action ratios are the primary determinant of how the action can be regulated.  I would say let-off is not compromisable for reasons given.  Action ratios are determined by the set up of the action.  Blow distance, key dip, aftertouch can all be modified to achieve what is the most important for your pianist. Sometimes you will be altering more than one of those.  But you have to pay the piper somewhere.  

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

My understanding is that 1/16" (or 2mm) is not actually the optimum spec, but rather one that includes a safety factor to accommodate humidity fluctuations affecting both the soundboard and the action itself. (Safety from blocking on the strings). So really, the theoretical ideal is "as close as tou can get it without interference"...but that's a concert quality goal rather than a home environment goal. 

FYI, I generally will make my final adjustments in aftertouch by slightly varying dip (at least as of this writing). 

Peter Grey Piano Doctor 

------------------------------
Peter Grey
Stratham NH
(603) 686-2395
pianodoctor57@gmail.com

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2026 14:37
From: David Skolnik
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

(note: this may be superceded by information in Joe Burros last post, but...)

"Paying the piper" is a much safer framing than "burying the bodies".
I've used David L's method of measuring aftertouch for long enough that I thought that I had come up with it on my own, but that rarely happens in real life.    I DID introduce my own obsessiveness into the process by challenging my self to determine where 'escapement' actually begins and ends.  One determinant would be, as Steven Rosenthal referenced, the fore and aft position of the jack relative to the knuckle.  Another would be the diameter (and intact profile) of the knuckle itself.  David L refered to avoiding front punching compression, but, even if not actually employed in the action itself, I found it much more revealing to use the white hammer felt front punchings (was PianoForte... don't know if Dale still has them) to totally eliminate the compression variable.  Aftertouch, as a discrete measurement, would begin at the end of escapement.
But no, that wasn't enough for me.  I wanted to know how much less than .030" would still permit escapement to happen, so I worked backwards, building back up from the .030" until I could see the effect, not of Richard's .010" (unless that's not what he meant) but of a balance paper .001" or .002".   The point was not how it would feel to a pianist, but how precise/consistent we can be in defining the measurements we quote.   What does it mean if one tech's .030" is another's .025 or .035?   

Additional things to overthink:
- aside from string envelope, what are the constraints of let-off proximity?  
- what is the envelope of let-off effectiveness? iow, how far from string before response is noticeably compromised?
- if increasing letoff distance, are we more concerned about the loss of pianissimo control or of power?
- do we fine-tune our blow distance/hammer line when we've adjusted our bore distances to irregular string levels, or do we use a compromise hammer line? 

------------------------------
David Skolnik [RPT]
Hastings-on-Hudson NY
(917) 589-2625

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2026 12:48
From: David Love
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

That's too much aftertouch (.049").  

I always set aftertouch last and usually .030.  I do this with a punching of the same thickness, insert under the key and add or subtract punchings until the hammer just lets off with little pressure on the key at the bottom of the stroke (without front punching compression). 

Aftertouch is a requirement to insure jack escapement from the knuckle. It's not a distance that pianists will necessarily feel.  What they will feel is the consequence of too little (hammer bobbling) or too much (excessive key dip--perhaps).  I aim for uniform aftertouch. The formula is quite simple.  Too much and pianists will have a harder time controlling pianissimo as the hammer may not get close enough to the string on ppp blows.  Too little let-off and you risk double striking.  If you want to set uniform key dip, that's fine, but then to get uniform aftertouch you will have to vary the blow distance.  I'm ok with that, within reason.  

Pianists (many) are sensitive to key dip and so the absolute value and uniformity, without being excessive, is important.  Many who are obsessed with low inertia actions can run into difficulty because if they are achieving that largely through low action ratios they will have to have deeper key dip.  That can be a problem.  On the other hand, if you want a low inertia but also want heavier hammers, you will be stuck with deeper key dip or shorter blow distance. 

Sometimes you have to make compromises somewhere if the pianist is focusing on a specific regulation spec. Recall that the standard for key dip has changed as action ratios have gotten lower.  Someone used to a 9 mm key dip might be troubled by 10 mm which is more the current standard (probably 10-10.5 mm).

The reality is you will almost always have to compromise something to get the specs you want because everything you do affects other things.  Action ratios are the primary determinant of how the action can be regulated.  I would say let-off is not compromisable for reasons given.  Action ratios are determined by the set up of the action.  Blow distance, key dip, aftertouch can all be modified to achieve what is the most important for your pianist. Sometimes you will be altering more than one of those.  But you have to pay the piper somewhere.  

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320

Original Message:
Sent: 01-19-2026 19:09
From: Joseph Burros
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

For me, it's a simple matter. There are three things at work here: blow, dip and AT. Only two out of three of those can be a fixed quantity. Fixing all three is impossible in the real world, with minute discrepancies among action parts from note to note affecting the AR and the outcome. The irreconcilability of dip and AT will exist no matter what the blow, so blow is the obvious choice for a fixed "straight-line" of the regulation. 

This leaves you with the choice between dip and AT. Say, the disagreement is 15 mils. Where should it go? A good pianist will sure notice the 15 mil error if you put into a 45 mil AT, than if you put it in a .395-.425 dip. This point was first made to me in a class by the sorely-missed LaRoy Edwards, years ago. 

------------------------------
William Ballard RPT
WBPS
Saxtons River VT
802-869-3161

"Our lives contain a thousand springs
and dies if one be gone
Strange that a harp of a thousand strings
should keep in tune so long."
...........Dr. Watts, "The Continental Harmony,1774

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2026 22:12
From: Peter Grey
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

My understanding is that 1/16" (or 2mm) is not actually the optimum spec, but rather one that includes a safety factor to accommodate humidity fluctuations affecting both the soundboard and the action itself. (Safety from blocking on the strings). So really, the theoretical ideal is "as close as tou can get it without interference"...but that's a concert quality goal rather than a home environment goal. 

FYI, I generally will make my final adjustments in aftertouch by slightly varying dip (at least as of this writing). 

Peter Grey Piano Doctor 

------------------------------
Peter Grey
Stratham NH
(603) 686-2395
pianodoctor57@gmail.com

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2026 14:37
From: David Skolnik
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

(note: this may be superceded by information in Joe Burros last post, but...)

"Paying the piper" is a much safer framing than "burying the bodies".
I've used David L's method of measuring aftertouch for long enough that I thought that I had come up with it on my own, but that rarely happens in real life.    I DID introduce my own obsessiveness into the process by challenging my self to determine where 'escapement' actually begins and ends.  One determinant would be, as Steven Rosenthal referenced, the fore and aft position of the jack relative to the knuckle.  Another would be the diameter (and intact profile) of the knuckle itself.  David L refered to avoiding front punching compression, but, even if not actually employed in the action itself, I found it much more revealing to use the white hammer felt front punchings (was PianoForte... don't know if Dale still has them) to totally eliminate the compression variable.  Aftertouch, as a discrete measurement, would begin at the end of escapement.
But no, that wasn't enough for me.  I wanted to know how much less than .030" would still permit escapement to happen, so I worked backwards, building back up from the .030" until I could see the effect, not of Richard's .010" (unless that's not what he meant) but of a balance paper .001" or .002".   The point was not how it would feel to a pianist, but how precise/consistent we can be in defining the measurements we quote.   What does it mean if one tech's .030" is another's .025 or .035?   

Additional things to overthink:
- aside from string envelope, what are the constraints of let-off proximity?  
- what is the envelope of let-off effectiveness? iow, how far from string before response is noticeably compromised?
- if increasing letoff distance, are we more concerned about the loss of pianissimo control or of power?
- do we fine-tune our blow distance/hammer line when we've adjusted our bore distances to irregular string levels, or do we use a compromise hammer line? 

------------------------------
David Skolnik [RPT]
Hastings-on-Hudson NY
(917) 589-2625

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2026 12:48
From: David Love
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

That's too much aftertouch (.049").  

I always set aftertouch last and usually .030.  I do this with a punching of the same thickness, insert under the key and add or subtract punchings until the hammer just lets off with little pressure on the key at the bottom of the stroke (without front punching compression). 

Aftertouch is a requirement to insure jack escapement from the knuckle. It's not a distance that pianists will necessarily feel.  What they will feel is the consequence of too little (hammer bobbling) or too much (excessive key dip--perhaps).  I aim for uniform aftertouch. The formula is quite simple.  Too much and pianists will have a harder time controlling pianissimo as the hammer may not get close enough to the string on ppp blows.  Too little let-off and you risk double striking.  If you want to set uniform key dip, that's fine, but then to get uniform aftertouch you will have to vary the blow distance.  I'm ok with that, within reason.  

Pianists (many) are sensitive to key dip and so the absolute value and uniformity, without being excessive, is important.  Many who are obsessed with low inertia actions can run into difficulty because if they are achieving that largely through low action ratios they will have to have deeper key dip.  That can be a problem.  On the other hand, if you want a low inertia but also want heavier hammers, you will be stuck with deeper key dip or shorter blow distance. 

Sometimes you have to make compromises somewhere if the pianist is focusing on a specific regulation spec. Recall that the standard for key dip has changed as action ratios have gotten lower.  Someone used to a 9 mm key dip might be troubled by 10 mm which is more the current standard (probably 10-10.5 mm).

The reality is you will almost always have to compromise something to get the specs you want because everything you do affects other things.  Action ratios are the primary determinant of how the action can be regulated.  I would say let-off is not compromisable for reasons given.  Action ratios are determined by the set up of the action.  Blow distance, key dip, aftertouch can all be modified to achieve what is the most important for your pianist. Sometimes you will be altering more than one of those.  But you have to pay the piper somewhere.  

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320

Original Message:
Sent: 01-19-2026 19:09
From: Joseph Burros
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

David L,

While I started my regulations aiming for .030" AT, I now use .040" ideally. While mechanically we're just aiming to clear the jack from the knuckle, I think the extra .010" gives a very different tactile feeling to the performer- a more decisive disconnection from the knuckle. Speaking for myself, this is tremendously helpful for very fast, quiet music where I don't want to ever feel the bottom of the key stroke, but rather I want to accelerate the key and "get out of the way," allowing the key for finish its cycle without my finger. I know some recommend closer to .050" (someone even .060"!), but this starts to feel sloppy to me.

I've also noticed that when an action is heavier than the pianist feels is ideal, the slightly larger AT makes the action feel a little lighter, which is many circumstances is welcomed, especially on Steinways with heavy hammers and a higher AR.

For me, it's a simple matter. There are three things at work here: blow, dip and AT. Only two out of three of those can be a fixed quantity. Fixing all three is impossible in the real world, with minute discrepancies among action parts from note to note affecting the AR and the outcome. The irreconcilability of dip and AT will exist no matter what the blow, so blow is the obvious choice for a fixed "straight-line" of the regulation. 

This leaves you with the choice between dip and AT. Say, the disagreement is 15 mils. Where should it go? A good pianist will sure notice the 15 mil error if you put into a 45 mil AT, than if you put it in a .395-.425 dip. This point was first made to me in a class by the sorely-missed LaRoy Edwards, years ago. 

------------------------------
William Ballard RPT
WBPS
Saxtons River VT
802-869-3161

"Our lives contain a thousand springs
and dies if one be gone
Strange that a harp of a thousand strings
should keep in tune so long."
...........Dr. Watts, "The Continental Harmony,1774

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2026 22:12
From: Peter Grey
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

My understanding is that 1/16" (or 2mm) is not actually the optimum spec, but rather one that includes a safety factor to accommodate humidity fluctuations affecting both the soundboard and the action itself. (Safety from blocking on the strings). So really, the theoretical ideal is "as close as tou can get it without interference"...but that's a concert quality goal rather than a home environment goal. 

FYI, I generally will make my final adjustments in aftertouch by slightly varying dip (at least as of this writing). 

Peter Grey Piano Doctor 

------------------------------
Peter Grey
Stratham NH
(603) 686-2395
pianodoctor57@gmail.com

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2026 14:37
From: David Skolnik
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

(note: this may be superceded by information in Joe Burros last post, but...)

"Paying the piper" is a much safer framing than "burying the bodies".
I've used David L's method of measuring aftertouch for long enough that I thought that I had come up with it on my own, but that rarely happens in real life.    I DID introduce my own obsessiveness into the process by challenging my self to determine where 'escapement' actually begins and ends.  One determinant would be, as Steven Rosenthal referenced, the fore and aft position of the jack relative to the knuckle.  Another would be the diameter (and intact profile) of the knuckle itself.  David L refered to avoiding front punching compression, but, even if not actually employed in the action itself, I found it much more revealing to use the white hammer felt front punchings (was PianoForte... don't know if Dale still has them) to totally eliminate the compression variable.  Aftertouch, as a discrete measurement, would begin at the end of escapement.
But no, that wasn't enough for me.  I wanted to know how much less than .030" would still permit escapement to happen, so I worked backwards, building back up from the .030" until I could see the effect, not of Richard's .010" (unless that's not what he meant) but of a balance paper .001" or .002".   The point was not how it would feel to a pianist, but how precise/consistent we can be in defining the measurements we quote.   What does it mean if one tech's .030" is another's .025 or .035?   

Additional things to overthink:
- aside from string envelope, what are the constraints of let-off proximity?  
- what is the envelope of let-off effectiveness? iow, how far from string before response is noticeably compromised?
- if increasing letoff distance, are we more concerned about the loss of pianissimo control or of power?
- do we fine-tune our blow distance/hammer line when we've adjusted our bore distances to irregular string levels, or do we use a compromise hammer line? 

------------------------------
David Skolnik [RPT]
Hastings-on-Hudson NY
(917) 589-2625

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2026 12:48
From: David Love
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

That's too much aftertouch (.049").  

I always set aftertouch last and usually .030.  I do this with a punching of the same thickness, insert under the key and add or subtract punchings until the hammer just lets off with little pressure on the key at the bottom of the stroke (without front punching compression). 

Aftertouch is a requirement to insure jack escapement from the knuckle. It's not a distance that pianists will necessarily feel.  What they will feel is the consequence of too little (hammer bobbling) or too much (excessive key dip--perhaps).  I aim for uniform aftertouch. The formula is quite simple.  Too much and pianists will have a harder time controlling pianissimo as the hammer may not get close enough to the string on ppp blows.  Too little let-off and you risk double striking.  If you want to set uniform key dip, that's fine, but then to get uniform aftertouch you will have to vary the blow distance.  I'm ok with that, within reason.  

Pianists (many) are sensitive to key dip and so the absolute value and uniformity, without being excessive, is important.  Many who are obsessed with low inertia actions can run into difficulty because if they are achieving that largely through low action ratios they will have to have deeper key dip.  That can be a problem.  On the other hand, if you want a low inertia but also want heavier hammers, you will be stuck with deeper key dip or shorter blow distance. 

Sometimes you have to make compromises somewhere if the pianist is focusing on a specific regulation spec. Recall that the standard for key dip has changed as action ratios have gotten lower.  Someone used to a 9 mm key dip might be troubled by 10 mm which is more the current standard (probably 10-10.5 mm).

The reality is you will almost always have to compromise something to get the specs you want because everything you do affects other things.  Action ratios are the primary determinant of how the action can be regulated.  I would say let-off is not compromisable for reasons given.  Action ratios are determined by the set up of the action.  Blow distance, key dip, aftertouch can all be modified to achieve what is the most important for your pianist. Sometimes you will be altering more than one of those.  But you have to pay the piper somewhere.  

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320

Original Message:
Sent: 01-19-2026 19:09
From: Joseph Burros
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

Lots to parse here.  

Re Bill Ballard's comments.  I agree, you will always have to compromise something because of the slight differences in ARs note to note (and section to section) for reasons stated.  I wasn't suggesting that blow distance might be altered note to note, but section to section might be required.  Old capstan lines are such that key ratios can be different in the bass than in the treble (and often are--especially on Steinway pianos).  Otherwise, an even hammer line is desirable for me.

As stated, I use a .030" punching for setting AT and target a defined release.  Whether the measured AT is actually .030" I don't know.  I don't measure after the fact.  Because I'm looking for positive clearance without compression of the front felt punching, it's quite possible that if measured the AT might be greater than .030", but probably not much.  I like Ed Foote's post and I likely got the idea of using the punching to gauge AT from him many years ago.  As I mentioned, I started at .040" and have since reduced it slightly, at least procedurally if not actually.

As to whether one should set uniform let-off, it's a good question.  Traditionally, let-off was often set a bit greater in the bass.  Presumably, that's due to greater string extrusion in the lower part of the piano.  The data I have found suggests approximate string extrusion as follows for a ff blow. 

C1: 5/32" - 3/16"

C3: 3/32" - 7/64"

C5: 1/32" - 3/64"

C 7: 1/64"

Greater string extrusion in the bass is the argument for greater let-off.  When might it come into play?  I would guess with a ff blow followed immediately by a pp blow while the string is still near its extrusion maximum.  You run the risk of blocking with that second pp blow if the let-off is too close or with certain touch combinations.  I have always set the bass let-off a bit deeper, in fact, some procedures call for let-off to be based on the string diameter.  I think that's not a bad protocol.  Note that because the bass hammers have more mass, they are more likely to be carried through the let-off gap by virtue of their own momentum so on softer blows the concern about not getting a strike is probably not warranted.  

David L,

While I started my regulations aiming for .030" AT, I now use .040" ideally. While mechanically we're just aiming to clear the jack from the knuckle, I think the extra .010" gives a very different tactile feeling to the performer- a more decisive disconnection from the knuckle. Speaking for myself, this is tremendously helpful for very fast, quiet music where I don't want to ever feel the bottom of the key stroke, but rather I want to accelerate the key and "get out of the way," allowing the key for finish its cycle without my finger. I know some recommend closer to .050" (someone even .060"!), but this starts to feel sloppy to me.

I've also noticed that when an action is heavier than the pianist feels is ideal, the slightly larger AT makes the action feel a little lighter, which is many circumstances is welcomed, especially on Steinways with heavy hammers and a higher AR.

For me, it's a simple matter. There are three things at work here: blow, dip and AT. Only two out of three of those can be a fixed quantity. Fixing all three is impossible in the real world, with minute discrepancies among action parts from note to note affecting the AR and the outcome. The irreconcilability of dip and AT will exist no matter what the blow, so blow is the obvious choice for a fixed "straight-line" of the regulation. 

This leaves you with the choice between dip and AT. Say, the disagreement is 15 mils. Where should it go? A good pianist will sure notice the 15 mil error if you put into a 45 mil AT, than if you put it in a .395-.425 dip. This point was first made to me in a class by the sorely-missed LaRoy Edwards, years ago. 

------------------------------
William Ballard RPT
WBPS
Saxtons River VT
802-869-3161

"Our lives contain a thousand springs
and dies if one be gone
Strange that a harp of a thousand strings
should keep in tune so long."
...........Dr. Watts, "The Continental Harmony,1774

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2026 22:12
From: Peter Grey
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

My understanding is that 1/16" (or 2mm) is not actually the optimum spec, but rather one that includes a safety factor to accommodate humidity fluctuations affecting both the soundboard and the action itself. (Safety from blocking on the strings). So really, the theoretical ideal is "as close as tou can get it without interference"...but that's a concert quality goal rather than a home environment goal. 

FYI, I generally will make my final adjustments in aftertouch by slightly varying dip (at least as of this writing). 

Peter Grey Piano Doctor 

------------------------------
Peter Grey
Stratham NH
(603) 686-2395
pianodoctor57@gmail.com

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2026 14:37
From: David Skolnik
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

(note: this may be superceded by information in Joe Burros last post, but...)

"Paying the piper" is a much safer framing than "burying the bodies".
I've used David L's method of measuring aftertouch for long enough that I thought that I had come up with it on my own, but that rarely happens in real life.    I DID introduce my own obsessiveness into the process by challenging my self to determine where 'escapement' actually begins and ends.  One determinant would be, as Steven Rosenthal referenced, the fore and aft position of the jack relative to the knuckle.  Another would be the diameter (and intact profile) of the knuckle itself.  David L refered to avoiding front punching compression, but, even if not actually employed in the action itself, I found it much more revealing to use the white hammer felt front punchings (was PianoForte... don't know if Dale still has them) to totally eliminate the compression variable.  Aftertouch, as a discrete measurement, would begin at the end of escapement.
But no, that wasn't enough for me.  I wanted to know how much less than .030" would still permit escapement to happen, so I worked backwards, building back up from the .030" until I could see the effect, not of Richard's .010" (unless that's not what he meant) but of a balance paper .001" or .002".   The point was not how it would feel to a pianist, but how precise/consistent we can be in defining the measurements we quote.   What does it mean if one tech's .030" is another's .025 or .035?   

Additional things to overthink:
- aside from string envelope, what are the constraints of let-off proximity?  
- what is the envelope of let-off effectiveness? iow, how far from string before response is noticeably compromised?
- if increasing letoff distance, are we more concerned about the loss of pianissimo control or of power?
- do we fine-tune our blow distance/hammer line when we've adjusted our bore distances to irregular string levels, or do we use a compromise hammer line? 

------------------------------
David Skolnik [RPT]
Hastings-on-Hudson NY
(917) 589-2625

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2026 12:48
From: David Love
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

That's too much aftertouch (.049").  

I always set aftertouch last and usually .030.  I do this with a punching of the same thickness, insert under the key and add or subtract punchings until the hammer just lets off with little pressure on the key at the bottom of the stroke (without front punching compression). 

Aftertouch is a requirement to insure jack escapement from the knuckle. It's not a distance that pianists will necessarily feel.  What they will feel is the consequence of too little (hammer bobbling) or too much (excessive key dip--perhaps).  I aim for uniform aftertouch. The formula is quite simple.  Too much and pianists will have a harder time controlling pianissimo as the hammer may not get close enough to the string on ppp blows.  Too little let-off and you risk double striking.  If you want to set uniform key dip, that's fine, but then to get uniform aftertouch you will have to vary the blow distance.  I'm ok with that, within reason.  

Pianists (many) are sensitive to key dip and so the absolute value and uniformity, without being excessive, is important.  Many who are obsessed with low inertia actions can run into difficulty because if they are achieving that largely through low action ratios they will have to have deeper key dip.  That can be a problem.  On the other hand, if you want a low inertia but also want heavier hammers, you will be stuck with deeper key dip or shorter blow distance. 

Sometimes you have to make compromises somewhere if the pianist is focusing on a specific regulation spec. Recall that the standard for key dip has changed as action ratios have gotten lower.  Someone used to a 9 mm key dip might be troubled by 10 mm which is more the current standard (probably 10-10.5 mm).

The reality is you will almost always have to compromise something to get the specs you want because everything you do affects other things.  Action ratios are the primary determinant of how the action can be regulated.  I would say let-off is not compromisable for reasons given.  Action ratios are determined by the set up of the action.  Blow distance, key dip, aftertouch can all be modified to achieve what is the most important for your pianist. Sometimes you will be altering more than one of those.  But you have to pay the piper somewhere.  

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320

Original Message:
Sent: 01-19-2026 19:09
From: Joseph Burros
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

Daivid went: "I wasn't suggesting that blow distance might be altered note to note, but section to section might be required."

It's a conundrum, how to tweek the pertinent adjustments to satisfy a perceived inconsistency from one note to the next. Blow is the easiest, and indeed, one revered CT technician years ago corrected such a situation with an occasional "cranked" shank. It's alot easier than going into the keyboard to change dip or AT. But then again, we like working with straight lines.

Let-off is crucial for staying out of trouble up at the string, but doesn't affect dip or AT much. After dividing the ∆ let-off by the AR, its effect the key is semi-negligible. You can do anything you want with it, for other reasons.

Tim Forster went: "I wasn't suggesting that blow distance might be altered note to note, but section to section might be required."

Let-off relieves the fingers of the weight of the hammers. I'm sure that they enjoy a little breather with that load off, before going back to work on the next note. If AT is too slim, their fingers might not get properly refreshed, especially with a high inertia action. A proper AT gives them a little break from the heavy lifting.

------------------------------
William Ballard RPT
WBPS
Saxtons River VT
802-869-3161

"Our lives contain a thousand springs
and dies if one be gone
Strange that a harp of a thousand strings
should keep in tune so long."
...........Dr. Watts, "The Continental Harmony,1774

Original Message:
Sent: 01-21-2026 19:51
From: David Love
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

Lots to parse here.  

Re Bill Ballard's comments.  I agree, you will always have to compromise something because of the slight differences in ARs note to note (and section to section) for reasons stated.  I wasn't suggesting that blow distance might be altered note to note, but section to section might be required.  Old capstan lines are such that key ratios can be different in the bass than in the treble (and often are--especially on Steinway pianos).  Otherwise, an even hammer line is desirable for me.

As stated, I use a .030" punching for setting AT and target a defined release.  Whether the measured AT is actually .030" I don't know.  I don't measure after the fact.  Because I'm looking for positive clearance without compression of the front felt punching, it's quite possible that if measured the AT might be greater than .030", but probably not much.  I like Ed Foote's post and I likely got the idea of using the punching to gauge AT from him many years ago.  As I mentioned, I started at .040" and have since reduced it slightly, at least procedurally if not actually.

As to whether one should set uniform let-off, it's a good question.  Traditionally, let-off was often set a bit greater in the bass.  Presumably, that's due to greater string extrusion in the lower part of the piano.  The data I have found suggests approximate string extrusion as follows for a ff blow. 

C1: 5/32" - 3/16"

C3: 3/32" - 7/64"

C5: 1/32" - 3/64"

C 7: 1/64"

Greater string extrusion in the bass is the argument for greater let-off.  When might it come into play?  I would guess with a ff blow followed immediately by a pp blow while the string is still near its extrusion maximum.  You run the risk of blocking with that second pp blow if the let-off is too close or with certain touch combinations.  I have always set the bass let-off a bit deeper, in fact, some procedures call for let-off to be based on the string diameter.  I think that's not a bad protocol.  Note that because the bass hammers have more mass, they are more likely to be carried through the let-off gap by virtue of their own momentum so on softer blows the concern about not getting a strike is probably not warranted.  

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320

Original Message:
Sent: 01-21-2026 09:23
From: Tim Foster
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

David L,

While I started my regulations aiming for .030" AT, I now use .040" ideally. While mechanically we're just aiming to clear the jack from the knuckle, I think the extra .010" gives a very different tactile feeling to the performer- a more decisive disconnection from the knuckle. Speaking for myself, this is tremendously helpful for very fast, quiet music where I don't want to ever feel the bottom of the key stroke, but rather I want to accelerate the key and "get out of the way," allowing the key for finish its cycle without my finger. I know some recommend closer to .050" (someone even .060"!), but this starts to feel sloppy to me.

I've also noticed that when an action is heavier than the pianist feels is ideal, the slightly larger AT makes the action feel a little lighter, which is many circumstances is welcomed, especially on Steinways with heavy hammers and a higher AR.

------------------------------
Tim Foster RPT
New Oxford PA
(470) 231-6074

Original Message:
Sent: 01-21-2026 08:50
From: Bill Ballard
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

For me, it's a simple matter. There are three things at work here: blow, dip and AT. Only two out of three of those can be a fixed quantity. Fixing all three is impossible in the real world, with minute discrepancies among action parts from note to note affecting the AR and the outcome. The irreconcilability of dip and AT will exist no matter what the blow, so blow is the obvious choice for a fixed "straight-line" of the regulation. 

This leaves you with the choice between dip and AT. Say, the disagreement is 15 mils. Where should it go? A good pianist will sure notice the 15 mil error if you put into a 45 mil AT, than if you put it in a .395-.425 dip. This point was first made to me in a class by the sorely-missed LaRoy Edwards, years ago. 

------------------------------
William Ballard RPT
WBPS
Saxtons River VT
802-869-3161

"Our lives contain a thousand springs
and dies if one be gone
Strange that a harp of a thousand strings
should keep in tune so long."
...........Dr. Watts, "The Continental Harmony,1774

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2026 22:12
From: Peter Grey
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

My understanding is that 1/16" (or 2mm) is not actually the optimum spec, but rather one that includes a safety factor to accommodate humidity fluctuations affecting both the soundboard and the action itself. (Safety from blocking on the strings). So really, the theoretical ideal is "as close as tou can get it without interference"...but that's a concert quality goal rather than a home environment goal. 

FYI, I generally will make my final adjustments in aftertouch by slightly varying dip (at least as of this writing). 

Peter Grey Piano Doctor 

------------------------------
Peter Grey
Stratham NH
(603) 686-2395
pianodoctor57@gmail.com

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2026 14:37
From: David Skolnik
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

(note: this may be superceded by information in Joe Burros last post, but...)

"Paying the piper" is a much safer framing than "burying the bodies".
I've used David L's method of measuring aftertouch for long enough that I thought that I had come up with it on my own, but that rarely happens in real life.    I DID introduce my own obsessiveness into the process by challenging my self to determine where 'escapement' actually begins and ends.  One determinant would be, as Steven Rosenthal referenced, the fore and aft position of the jack relative to the knuckle.  Another would be the diameter (and intact profile) of the knuckle itself.  David L refered to avoiding front punching compression, but, even if not actually employed in the action itself, I found it much more revealing to use the white hammer felt front punchings (was PianoForte... don't know if Dale still has them) to totally eliminate the compression variable.  Aftertouch, as a discrete measurement, would begin at the end of escapement.
But no, that wasn't enough for me.  I wanted to know how much less than .030" would still permit escapement to happen, so I worked backwards, building back up from the .030" until I could see the effect, not of Richard's .010" (unless that's not what he meant) but of a balance paper .001" or .002".   The point was not how it would feel to a pianist, but how precise/consistent we can be in defining the measurements we quote.   What does it mean if one tech's .030" is another's .025 or .035?   

Additional things to overthink:
- aside from string envelope, what are the constraints of let-off proximity?  
- what is the envelope of let-off effectiveness? iow, how far from string before response is noticeably compromised?
- if increasing letoff distance, are we more concerned about the loss of pianissimo control or of power?
- do we fine-tune our blow distance/hammer line when we've adjusted our bore distances to irregular string levels, or do we use a compromise hammer line? 

------------------------------
David Skolnik [RPT]
Hastings-on-Hudson NY
(917) 589-2625

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2026 12:48
From: David Love
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

That's too much aftertouch (.049").  

I always set aftertouch last and usually .030.  I do this with a punching of the same thickness, insert under the key and add or subtract punchings until the hammer just lets off with little pressure on the key at the bottom of the stroke (without front punching compression). 

Aftertouch is a requirement to insure jack escapement from the knuckle. It's not a distance that pianists will necessarily feel.  What they will feel is the consequence of too little (hammer bobbling) or too much (excessive key dip--perhaps).  I aim for uniform aftertouch. The formula is quite simple.  Too much and pianists will have a harder time controlling pianissimo as the hammer may not get close enough to the string on ppp blows.  Too little let-off and you risk double striking.  If you want to set uniform key dip, that's fine, but then to get uniform aftertouch you will have to vary the blow distance.  I'm ok with that, within reason.  

Pianists (many) are sensitive to key dip and so the absolute value and uniformity, without being excessive, is important.  Many who are obsessed with low inertia actions can run into difficulty because if they are achieving that largely through low action ratios they will have to have deeper key dip.  That can be a problem.  On the other hand, if you want a low inertia but also want heavier hammers, you will be stuck with deeper key dip or shorter blow distance. 

Sometimes you have to make compromises somewhere if the pianist is focusing on a specific regulation spec. Recall that the standard for key dip has changed as action ratios have gotten lower.  Someone used to a 9 mm key dip might be troubled by 10 mm which is more the current standard (probably 10-10.5 mm).

The reality is you will almost always have to compromise something to get the specs you want because everything you do affects other things.  Action ratios are the primary determinant of how the action can be regulated.  I would say let-off is not compromisable for reasons given.  Action ratios are determined by the set up of the action.  Blow distance, key dip, aftertouch can all be modified to achieve what is the most important for your pianist. Sometimes you will be altering more than one of those.  But you have to pay the piper somewhere.  

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320

Original Message:
Sent: 01-19-2026 19:09
From: Joseph Burros
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

I don't agree with this. AT changes with both let-off and blow distance (and key dip, of course).  How much depends on, well, how much, but they are all interlinked.  I would choose to adjust the dip (after checking the let-off and jack position) rather than raise one hammer's blow distance.  YMMV

I question the assertion that AT giving the fingers a "rest". The heavy lifting is at the initiation of the stroke. The best pianists, or athletes in general, have a high level of efficiency in their effort with relaxation of the muscles taking over quickly.  I studied with many excellent teachers: Adolph Baller, William Corbett Jones, Peggy Salkind.  Relaxation was key (no pun intended).  All of them emphasized this element of what is referred to as NME (neuro muscular efficiency), though they didn't necessarily call it that.  The nature of reciprocal inhibition suggests that after the finger has initiated the keystroke it must start to get ready for the next movement.  So, there is a constant hand off between the agonist muscles (the ones doing the work) and the antagonist muscles (the one's that would pull in the opposite direction or lift the finger.  Let's leave arm and wrist out of this for the moment, though it's not unimportant.  Once the finger has done the work of depressing the key to the level necessary, the antagonist muscles take over to move the finger in the opposite direction and ready it for the next movement.  Thus, the agonist muscles must relax completely.  In most playing, or much playing, by the time the finger gets to the bottom of the key, the agonist muscles are already relaxed, or relaxing, and the antagonist muscles are taking over.  Of course, there are exceptions to that rule for some dynamic requirements.  Thus, by the bottom of the key stroke, the agonist muscles have mostly finished their work.

I do agree that too little or too much AT is a problem. I probably misstated when I said that pianists don't sense aftertouch. They do "sense" it, as they do all changes made to the action. Better to have said they don't "identify' AT, generally. Too little AT and they may perceive the action as shallow and with a hard(er) landing. Too much and they may feel too much dip or simply excess key travel or sluggishness. Depends on the absolute numbers and likely other factors--not the least of which is what they are used to. 

To digress for a minute, what's interesting here is that we go to great lengths, by typical touchweight protocols, to balance actions to .1 grams DW, driven probably by the digital scales that we use.  But some technicians even market their rebuilt action product based on that standard.  The reality is, that pianists play the piano at all different positions on the key and balancing the DW (or BW--the modern standard) to .1g is only relevant if the pianist is playing the piano at the same point on each key--which they don't.  Move halfway to the balance rail and the weight doubles, but the inertia quadruples!  Yet pianists still report on an action how "even" it feels after precision balancing.  Power of suggestion and placebo effect aside, it is a misnomer by any measure.  It doesn't feel "even" because it isn't and never will be. Moreover, DW, in and of itself, has no direct effect on inertia, which is much more important number.  I've always thought that what pianists want is predictability.  This is true whether it comes to regulation, touchweight, inertia, voicing.  They want to know that when they reach for a note it will respond as they anticipate.  The touchweight model is anything but uniform but it can be preditable.  Of course, for most pianists who play the same out of regulation, erratically voiced and even sometimes out of tune piano, it can still be predictable because they know it and all it's flaws.  They are able to anticipate that this note might require a bit more force or that this note is too bright.  I recall with WC Jones that I was working on some piece and mentioned that some note was too bright.  He said, "well now that you know it's too bright just adjust how you play it".  Took me aback at the time.  

To continue, inertia is determined, primarily, by the product of the AR and the SW. If you double the hammer mass, the inertia doubles.  But if you double the AR, the inertia quadruples.  So even laboring over smoothing SWs to the .1g is not as important as making sure that the ARs are uniform.  But that's harder due to irregularities in manufacturing, as we know.  While we're talking about regulation, not touchweight, identifying what pianists are most likely to respond to (sometimes in spite of what they believe they are responding to) is the challenge.  Again, I believe it's predictability of response more than any absolute number we assign to a given spec.  Identifying which spec is most important, the equivalent of the quadrupling effect of inertia, when it comes to action regulation is, of course, more difficult and I'm sure we'll get lots of disagreement.  

That's a big digression (sorry), but to our point, what pianists want is predictability, in this case, predictability of feel.  Uniform AT contributes to that predictability.  Is it the most important thing?  Action regulation is a gestalt, the whole being more than just the sum of a pile of parts or regulation specs.  So, I can't answer that question but it's certainly a factor.  Bottom line, we do the best we can and trust that pianists are very capable of adapting to what amounts to BMDs (barely measurable differences).  We may choose to favor one spec over another but, invariably, different pianists will be sensitive to different specs.  So, spending too much time sweating over which spec should take priority is probably a waste.  Moreover, have no doubt, once you think you've found it, some pianist will tell you they have other priorities.  Welcome to the club.  

Daivid went: "I wasn't suggesting that blow distance might be altered note to note, but section to section might be required."

It's a conundrum, how to tweek the pertinent adjustments to satisfy a perceived inconsistency from one note to the next. Blow is the easiest, and indeed, one revered CT technician years ago corrected such a situation with an occasional "cranked" shank. It's alot easier than going into the keyboard to change dip or AT. But then again, we like working with straight lines.

Let-off is crucial for staying out of trouble up at the string, but doesn't affect dip or AT much. After dividing the ∆ let-off by the AR, its effect the key is semi-negligible. You can do anything you want with it, for other reasons.

Tim Forster went: "I wasn't suggesting that blow distance might be altered note to note, but section to section might be required."

Let-off relieves the fingers of the weight of the hammers. I'm sure that they enjoy a little breather with that load off, before going back to work on the next note. If AT is too slim, their fingers might not get properly refreshed, especially with a high inertia action. A proper AT gives them a little break from the heavy lifting.

Lots to parse here.  

Re Bill Ballard's comments.  I agree, you will always have to compromise something because of the slight differences in ARs note to note (and section to section) for reasons stated.  I wasn't suggesting that blow distance might be altered note to note, but section to section might be required.  Old capstan lines are such that key ratios can be different in the bass than in the treble (and often are--especially on Steinway pianos).  Otherwise, an even hammer line is desirable for me.

As stated, I use a .030" punching for setting AT and target a defined release.  Whether the measured AT is actually .030" I don't know.  I don't measure after the fact.  Because I'm looking for positive clearance without compression of the front felt punching, it's quite possible that if measured the AT might be greater than .030", but probably not much.  I like Ed Foote's post and I likely got the idea of using the punching to gauge AT from him many years ago.  As I mentioned, I started at .040" and have since reduced it slightly, at least procedurally if not actually.

As to whether one should set uniform let-off, it's a good question.  Traditionally, let-off was often set a bit greater in the bass.  Presumably, that's due to greater string extrusion in the lower part of the piano.  The data I have found suggests approximate string extrusion as follows for a ff blow. 

C1: 5/32" - 3/16"

C3: 3/32" - 7/64"

C5: 1/32" - 3/64"

C 7: 1/64"

Greater string extrusion in the bass is the argument for greater let-off.  When might it come into play?  I would guess with a ff blow followed immediately by a pp blow while the string is still near its extrusion maximum.  You run the risk of blocking with that second pp blow if the let-off is too close or with certain touch combinations.  I have always set the bass let-off a bit deeper, in fact, some procedures call for let-off to be based on the string diameter.  I think that's not a bad protocol.  Note that because the bass hammers have more mass, they are more likely to be carried through the let-off gap by virtue of their own momentum so on softer blows the concern about not getting a strike is probably not warranted.  

David L,

While I started my regulations aiming for .030" AT, I now use .040" ideally. While mechanically we're just aiming to clear the jack from the knuckle, I think the extra .010" gives a very different tactile feeling to the performer- a more decisive disconnection from the knuckle. Speaking for myself, this is tremendously helpful for very fast, quiet music where I don't want to ever feel the bottom of the key stroke, but rather I want to accelerate the key and "get out of the way," allowing the key for finish its cycle without my finger. I know some recommend closer to .050" (someone even .060"!), but this starts to feel sloppy to me.

I've also noticed that when an action is heavier than the pianist feels is ideal, the slightly larger AT makes the action feel a little lighter, which is many circumstances is welcomed, especially on Steinways with heavy hammers and a higher AR.

For me, it's a simple matter. There are three things at work here: blow, dip and AT. Only two out of three of those can be a fixed quantity. Fixing all three is impossible in the real world, with minute discrepancies among action parts from note to note affecting the AR and the outcome. The irreconcilability of dip and AT will exist no matter what the blow, so blow is the obvious choice for a fixed "straight-line" of the regulation. 

This leaves you with the choice between dip and AT. Say, the disagreement is 15 mils. Where should it go? A good pianist will sure notice the 15 mil error if you put into a 45 mil AT, than if you put it in a .395-.425 dip. This point was first made to me in a class by the sorely-missed LaRoy Edwards, years ago. 

------------------------------
William Ballard RPT
WBPS
Saxtons River VT
802-869-3161

"Our lives contain a thousand springs
and dies if one be gone
Strange that a harp of a thousand strings
should keep in tune so long."
...........Dr. Watts, "The Continental Harmony,1774

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2026 22:12
From: Peter Grey
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

My understanding is that 1/16" (or 2mm) is not actually the optimum spec, but rather one that includes a safety factor to accommodate humidity fluctuations affecting both the soundboard and the action itself. (Safety from blocking on the strings). So really, the theoretical ideal is "as close as tou can get it without interference"...but that's a concert quality goal rather than a home environment goal. 

FYI, I generally will make my final adjustments in aftertouch by slightly varying dip (at least as of this writing). 

Peter Grey Piano Doctor 

------------------------------
Peter Grey
Stratham NH
(603) 686-2395
pianodoctor57@gmail.com

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2026 14:37
From: David Skolnik
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

(note: this may be superceded by information in Joe Burros last post, but...)

"Paying the piper" is a much safer framing than "burying the bodies".
I've used David L's method of measuring aftertouch for long enough that I thought that I had come up with it on my own, but that rarely happens in real life.    I DID introduce my own obsessiveness into the process by challenging my self to determine where 'escapement' actually begins and ends.  One determinant would be, as Steven Rosenthal referenced, the fore and aft position of the jack relative to the knuckle.  Another would be the diameter (and intact profile) of the knuckle itself.  David L refered to avoiding front punching compression, but, even if not actually employed in the action itself, I found it much more revealing to use the white hammer felt front punchings (was PianoForte... don't know if Dale still has them) to totally eliminate the compression variable.  Aftertouch, as a discrete measurement, would begin at the end of escapement.
But no, that wasn't enough for me.  I wanted to know how much less than .030" would still permit escapement to happen, so I worked backwards, building back up from the .030" until I could see the effect, not of Richard's .010" (unless that's not what he meant) but of a balance paper .001" or .002".   The point was not how it would feel to a pianist, but how precise/consistent we can be in defining the measurements we quote.   What does it mean if one tech's .030" is another's .025 or .035?   

Additional things to overthink:
- aside from string envelope, what are the constraints of let-off proximity?  
- what is the envelope of let-off effectiveness? iow, how far from string before response is noticeably compromised?
- if increasing letoff distance, are we more concerned about the loss of pianissimo control or of power?
- do we fine-tune our blow distance/hammer line when we've adjusted our bore distances to irregular string levels, or do we use a compromise hammer line? 

------------------------------
David Skolnik [RPT]
Hastings-on-Hudson NY
(917) 589-2625

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2026 12:48
From: David Love
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

That's too much aftertouch (.049").  

I always set aftertouch last and usually .030.  I do this with a punching of the same thickness, insert under the key and add or subtract punchings until the hammer just lets off with little pressure on the key at the bottom of the stroke (without front punching compression). 

Aftertouch is a requirement to insure jack escapement from the knuckle. It's not a distance that pianists will necessarily feel.  What they will feel is the consequence of too little (hammer bobbling) or too much (excessive key dip--perhaps).  I aim for uniform aftertouch. The formula is quite simple.  Too much and pianists will have a harder time controlling pianissimo as the hammer may not get close enough to the string on ppp blows.  Too little let-off and you risk double striking.  If you want to set uniform key dip, that's fine, but then to get uniform aftertouch you will have to vary the blow distance.  I'm ok with that, within reason.  

Pianists (many) are sensitive to key dip and so the absolute value and uniformity, without being excessive, is important.  Many who are obsessed with low inertia actions can run into difficulty because if they are achieving that largely through low action ratios they will have to have deeper key dip.  That can be a problem.  On the other hand, if you want a low inertia but also want heavier hammers, you will be stuck with deeper key dip or shorter blow distance. 

Sometimes you have to make compromises somewhere if the pianist is focusing on a specific regulation spec. Recall that the standard for key dip has changed as action ratios have gotten lower.  Someone used to a 9 mm key dip might be troubled by 10 mm which is more the current standard (probably 10-10.5 mm).

The reality is you will almost always have to compromise something to get the specs you want because everything you do affects other things.  Action ratios are the primary determinant of how the action can be regulated.  I would say let-off is not compromisable for reasons given.  Action ratios are determined by the set up of the action.  Blow distance, key dip, aftertouch can all be modified to achieve what is the most important for your pianist. Sometimes you will be altering more than one of those.  But you have to pay the piper somewhere.  

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320

Original Message:
Sent: 01-19-2026 19:09
From: Joseph Burros
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

I don't agree with this. AT changes with both let-off and blow distance (and key dip, of course).  How much depends on, well, how much, but they are all interlinked.  I would choose to adjust the dip (after checking the let-off and jack position) rather than raise one hammer's blow distance.  YMMV

I question the assertion that AT giving the fingers a "rest". The heavy lifting is at the initiation of the stroke. The best pianists, or athletes in general, have a high level of efficiency in their effort with relaxation of the muscles taking over quickly.  I studied with many excellent teachers: Adolph Baller, William Corbett Jones, Peggy Salkind.  Relaxation was key (no pun intended).  All of them emphasized this element of what is referred to as NME (neuro muscular efficiency), though they didn't necessarily call it that.  The nature of reciprocal inhibition suggests that after the finger has initiated the keystroke it must start to get ready for the next movement.  So, there is a constant hand off between the agonist muscles (the ones doing the work) and the antagonist muscles (the one's that would pull in the opposite direction or lift the finger.  Let's leave arm and wrist out of this for the moment, though it's not unimportant.  Once the finger has done the work of depressing the key to the level necessary, the antagonist muscles take over to move the finger in the opposite direction and ready it for the next movement.  Thus, the agonist muscles must relax completely.  In most playing, or much playing, by the time the finger gets to the bottom of the key, the agonist muscles are already relaxed, or relaxing, and the antagonist muscles are taking over.  Of course, there are exceptions to that rule for some dynamic requirements.  Thus, by the bottom of the key stroke, the agonist muscles have mostly finished their work.

I do agree that too little or too much AT is a problem. I probably misstated when I said that pianists don't sense aftertouch. They do "sense" it, as they do all changes made to the action. Better to have said they don't "identify' AT, generally. Too little AT and they may perceive the action as shallow and with a hard(er) landing. Too much and they may feel too much dip or simply excess key travel or sluggishness. Depends on the absolute numbers and likely other factors--not the least of which is what they are used to. 

To digress for a minute, what's interesting here is that we go to great lengths, by typical touchweight protocols, to balance actions to .1 grams DW, driven probably by the digital scales that we use.  But some technicians even market their rebuilt action product based on that standard.  The reality is, that pianists play the piano at all different positions on the key and balancing the DW (or BW--the modern standard) to .1g is only relevant if the pianist is playing the piano at the same point on each key--which they don't.  Move halfway to the balance rail and the weight doubles, but the inertia quadruples!  Yet pianists still report on an action how "even" it feels after precision balancing.  Power of suggestion and placebo effect aside, it is a misnomer by any measure.  It doesn't feel "even" because it isn't and never will be. Moreover, DW, in and of itself, has no direct effect on inertia, which is much more important number.  I've always thought that what pianists want is predictability.  This is true whether it comes to regulation, touchweight, inertia, voicing.  They want to know that when they reach for a note it will respond as they anticipate.  The touchweight model is anything but uniform but it can be preditable.  Of course, for most pianists who play the same out of regulation, erratically voiced and even sometimes out of tune piano, it can still be predictable because they know it and all it's flaws.  They are able to anticipate that this note might require a bit more force or that this note is too bright.  I recall with WC Jones that I was working on some piece and mentioned that some note was too bright.  He said, "well now that you know it's too bright just adjust how you play it".  Took me aback at the time.  

To continue, inertia is determined, primarily, by the product of the AR and the SW. If you double the hammer mass, the inertia doubles.  But if you double the AR, the inertia quadruples.  So even laboring over smoothing SWs to the .1g is not as important as making sure that the ARs are uniform.  But that's harder due to irregularities in manufacturing, as we know.  While we're talking about regulation, not touchweight, identifying what pianists are most likely to respond to (sometimes in spite of what they believe they are responding to) is the challenge.  Again, I believe it's predictability of response more than any absolute number we assign to a given spec.  Identifying which spec is most important, the equivalent of the quadrupling effect of inertia, when it comes to action regulation is, of course, more difficult and I'm sure we'll get lots of disagreement.  

*In the same way that touchweight dynamics will depend on the proximate position of the finger on the key, the importance of any single regulation spec will depend on touch dynamics, or how the key is played.  Soft playing brings into prominence different regulation specs than loud playing.  Fast passagework brings into prominence different specs than slow chord voicing, etc. The goal for us is to bring it all into balance to accommodate the greatest range of touch dynamics.   

That's a big digression (sorry), but to our point, what pianists want is predictability, in this case, predictability of feel.  Uniform AT contributes to that predictability.  Is it the most important thing?  Action regulation is a gestalt, the whole being more than just the sum of a pile of parts or regulation specs.  So, I can't answer that question but it's certainly a factor.  Bottom line, we do the best we can and trust that pianists are very capable of adapting to what amounts to BMDs (barely measurable differences).  We may choose to favor one spec over another but, invariably, different pianists will be sensitive to different specs.  So, spending too much time sweating over which spec should take priority is probably a waste.  Moreover, have no doubt, once you think you've found it, some pianist will tell you they have other priorities.  Welcome to the club.  

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320

Original Message:
Sent: 01-21-2026 22:00
From: Bill Ballard
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

Daivid went: "I wasn't suggesting that blow distance might be altered note to note, but section to section might be required."

It's a conundrum, how to tweek the pertinent adjustments to satisfy a perceived inconsistency from one note to the next. Blow is the easiest, and indeed, one revered CT technician years ago corrected such a situation with an occasional "cranked" shank. It's alot easier than going into the keyboard to change dip or AT. But then again, we like working with straight lines.

Let-off is crucial for staying out of trouble up at the string, but doesn't affect dip or AT much. After dividing the ∆ let-off by the AR, its effect the key is semi-negligible. You can do anything you want with it, for other reasons.

Tim Forster went: "I wasn't suggesting that blow distance might be altered note to note, but section to section might be required."

Let-off relieves the fingers of the weight of the hammers. I'm sure that they enjoy a little breather with that load off, before going back to work on the next note. If AT is too slim, their fingers might not get properly refreshed, especially with a high inertia action. A proper AT gives them a little break from the heavy lifting.

------------------------------
William Ballard RPT
WBPS
Saxtons River VT
802-869-3161

"Our lives contain a thousand springs
and dies if one be gone
Strange that a harp of a thousand strings
should keep in tune so long."
...........Dr. Watts, "The Continental Harmony,1774

Original Message:
Sent: 01-21-2026 19:51
From: David Love
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

Lots to parse here.  

Re Bill Ballard's comments.  I agree, you will always have to compromise something because of the slight differences in ARs note to note (and section to section) for reasons stated.  I wasn't suggesting that blow distance might be altered note to note, but section to section might be required.  Old capstan lines are such that key ratios can be different in the bass than in the treble (and often are--especially on Steinway pianos).  Otherwise, an even hammer line is desirable for me.

As stated, I use a .030" punching for setting AT and target a defined release.  Whether the measured AT is actually .030" I don't know.  I don't measure after the fact.  Because I'm looking for positive clearance without compression of the front felt punching, it's quite possible that if measured the AT might be greater than .030", but probably not much.  I like Ed Foote's post and I likely got the idea of using the punching to gauge AT from him many years ago.  As I mentioned, I started at .040" and have since reduced it slightly, at least procedurally if not actually.

As to whether one should set uniform let-off, it's a good question.  Traditionally, let-off was often set a bit greater in the bass.  Presumably, that's due to greater string extrusion in the lower part of the piano.  The data I have found suggests approximate string extrusion as follows for a ff blow. 

C1: 5/32" - 3/16"

C3: 3/32" - 7/64"

C5: 1/32" - 3/64"

C 7: 1/64"

Greater string extrusion in the bass is the argument for greater let-off.  When might it come into play?  I would guess with a ff blow followed immediately by a pp blow while the string is still near its extrusion maximum.  You run the risk of blocking with that second pp blow if the let-off is too close or with certain touch combinations.  I have always set the bass let-off a bit deeper, in fact, some procedures call for let-off to be based on the string diameter.  I think that's not a bad protocol.  Note that because the bass hammers have more mass, they are more likely to be carried through the let-off gap by virtue of their own momentum so on softer blows the concern about not getting a strike is probably not warranted.  

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320

Original Message:
Sent: 01-21-2026 09:23
From: Tim Foster
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

David L,

While I started my regulations aiming for .030" AT, I now use .040" ideally. While mechanically we're just aiming to clear the jack from the knuckle, I think the extra .010" gives a very different tactile feeling to the performer- a more decisive disconnection from the knuckle. Speaking for myself, this is tremendously helpful for very fast, quiet music where I don't want to ever feel the bottom of the key stroke, but rather I want to accelerate the key and "get out of the way," allowing the key for finish its cycle without my finger. I know some recommend closer to .050" (someone even .060"!), but this starts to feel sloppy to me.

I've also noticed that when an action is heavier than the pianist feels is ideal, the slightly larger AT makes the action feel a little lighter, which is many circumstances is welcomed, especially on Steinways with heavy hammers and a higher AR.

------------------------------
Tim Foster RPT
New Oxford PA
(470) 231-6074

Original Message:
Sent: 01-21-2026 08:50
From: Bill Ballard
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

For me, it's a simple matter. There are three things at work here: blow, dip and AT. Only two out of three of those can be a fixed quantity. Fixing all three is impossible in the real world, with minute discrepancies among action parts from note to note affecting the AR and the outcome. The irreconcilability of dip and AT will exist no matter what the blow, so blow is the obvious choice for a fixed "straight-line" of the regulation. 

This leaves you with the choice between dip and AT. Say, the disagreement is 15 mils. Where should it go? A good pianist will sure notice the 15 mil error if you put into a 45 mil AT, than if you put it in a .395-.425 dip. This point was first made to me in a class by the sorely-missed LaRoy Edwards, years ago. 

------------------------------
William Ballard RPT
WBPS
Saxtons River VT
802-869-3161

"Our lives contain a thousand springs
and dies if one be gone
Strange that a harp of a thousand strings
should keep in tune so long."
...........Dr. Watts, "The Continental Harmony,1774

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2026 22:12
From: Peter Grey
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

My understanding is that 1/16" (or 2mm) is not actually the optimum spec, but rather one that includes a safety factor to accommodate humidity fluctuations affecting both the soundboard and the action itself. (Safety from blocking on the strings). So really, the theoretical ideal is "as close as tou can get it without interference"...but that's a concert quality goal rather than a home environment goal. 

FYI, I generally will make my final adjustments in aftertouch by slightly varying dip (at least as of this writing). 

Peter Grey Piano Doctor 

------------------------------
Peter Grey
Stratham NH
(603) 686-2395
pianodoctor57@gmail.com

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2026 14:37
From: David Skolnik
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

(note: this may be superceded by information in Joe Burros last post, but...)

"Paying the piper" is a much safer framing than "burying the bodies".
I've used David L's method of measuring aftertouch for long enough that I thought that I had come up with it on my own, but that rarely happens in real life.    I DID introduce my own obsessiveness into the process by challenging my self to determine where 'escapement' actually begins and ends.  One determinant would be, as Steven Rosenthal referenced, the fore and aft position of the jack relative to the knuckle.  Another would be the diameter (and intact profile) of the knuckle itself.  David L refered to avoiding front punching compression, but, even if not actually employed in the action itself, I found it much more revealing to use the white hammer felt front punchings (was PianoForte... don't know if Dale still has them) to totally eliminate the compression variable.  Aftertouch, as a discrete measurement, would begin at the end of escapement.
But no, that wasn't enough for me.  I wanted to know how much less than .030" would still permit escapement to happen, so I worked backwards, building back up from the .030" until I could see the effect, not of Richard's .010" (unless that's not what he meant) but of a balance paper .001" or .002".   The point was not how it would feel to a pianist, but how precise/consistent we can be in defining the measurements we quote.   What does it mean if one tech's .030" is another's .025 or .035?   

Additional things to overthink:
- aside from string envelope, what are the constraints of let-off proximity?  
- what is the envelope of let-off effectiveness? iow, how far from string before response is noticeably compromised?
- if increasing letoff distance, are we more concerned about the loss of pianissimo control or of power?
- do we fine-tune our blow distance/hammer line when we've adjusted our bore distances to irregular string levels, or do we use a compromise hammer line? 

------------------------------
David Skolnik [RPT]
Hastings-on-Hudson NY
(917) 589-2625

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2026 12:48
From: David Love
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

That's too much aftertouch (.049").  

I always set aftertouch last and usually .030.  I do this with a punching of the same thickness, insert under the key and add or subtract punchings until the hammer just lets off with little pressure on the key at the bottom of the stroke (without front punching compression). 

Aftertouch is a requirement to insure jack escapement from the knuckle. It's not a distance that pianists will necessarily feel.  What they will feel is the consequence of too little (hammer bobbling) or too much (excessive key dip--perhaps).  I aim for uniform aftertouch. The formula is quite simple.  Too much and pianists will have a harder time controlling pianissimo as the hammer may not get close enough to the string on ppp blows.  Too little let-off and you risk double striking.  If you want to set uniform key dip, that's fine, but then to get uniform aftertouch you will have to vary the blow distance.  I'm ok with that, within reason.  

Pianists (many) are sensitive to key dip and so the absolute value and uniformity, without being excessive, is important.  Many who are obsessed with low inertia actions can run into difficulty because if they are achieving that largely through low action ratios they will have to have deeper key dip.  That can be a problem.  On the other hand, if you want a low inertia but also want heavier hammers, you will be stuck with deeper key dip or shorter blow distance. 

Sometimes you have to make compromises somewhere if the pianist is focusing on a specific regulation spec. Recall that the standard for key dip has changed as action ratios have gotten lower.  Someone used to a 9 mm key dip might be troubled by 10 mm which is more the current standard (probably 10-10.5 mm).

The reality is you will almost always have to compromise something to get the specs you want because everything you do affects other things.  Action ratios are the primary determinant of how the action can be regulated.  I would say let-off is not compromisable for reasons given.  Action ratios are determined by the set up of the action.  Blow distance, key dip, aftertouch can all be modified to achieve what is the most important for your pianist. Sometimes you will be altering more than one of those.  But you have to pay the piper somewhere.  

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320

Original Message:
Sent: 01-19-2026 19:09
From: Joseph Burros
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

For me, it's a simple matter. There are three things at work here: blow, dip and AT. Only two out of three of those can be a fixed quantity. Fixing all three is impossible in the real world, with minute discrepancies among action parts from note to note affecting the AR and the outcome. The irreconcilability of dip and AT will exist no matter what the blow, so blow is the obvious choice for a fixed "straight-line" of the regulation. 

This leaves you with the choice between dip and AT. Say, the disagreement is 15 mils. Where should it go? A good pianist will sure notice the 15 mil error if you put into a 45 mil AT, than if you put it in a .395-.425 dip. This point was first made to me in a class by the sorely-missed LaRoy Edwards, years ago. 

------------------------------
William Ballard RPT
WBPS
Saxtons River VT
802-869-3161

"Our lives contain a thousand springs
and dies if one be gone
Strange that a harp of a thousand strings
should keep in tune so long."
...........Dr. Watts, "The Continental Harmony,1774

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2026 22:12
From: Peter Grey
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

My understanding is that 1/16" (or 2mm) is not actually the optimum spec, but rather one that includes a safety factor to accommodate humidity fluctuations affecting both the soundboard and the action itself. (Safety from blocking on the strings). So really, the theoretical ideal is "as close as tou can get it without interference"...but that's a concert quality goal rather than a home environment goal. 

FYI, I generally will make my final adjustments in aftertouch by slightly varying dip (at least as of this writing). 

Peter Grey Piano Doctor 

------------------------------
Peter Grey
Stratham NH
(603) 686-2395
pianodoctor57@gmail.com

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2026 14:37
From: David Skolnik
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

(note: this may be superceded by information in Joe Burros last post, but...)

"Paying the piper" is a much safer framing than "burying the bodies".
I've used David L's method of measuring aftertouch for long enough that I thought that I had come up with it on my own, but that rarely happens in real life.    I DID introduce my own obsessiveness into the process by challenging my self to determine where 'escapement' actually begins and ends.  One determinant would be, as Steven Rosenthal referenced, the fore and aft position of the jack relative to the knuckle.  Another would be the diameter (and intact profile) of the knuckle itself.  David L refered to avoiding front punching compression, but, even if not actually employed in the action itself, I found it much more revealing to use the white hammer felt front punchings (was PianoForte... don't know if Dale still has them) to totally eliminate the compression variable.  Aftertouch, as a discrete measurement, would begin at the end of escapement.
But no, that wasn't enough for me.  I wanted to know how much less than .030" would still permit escapement to happen, so I worked backwards, building back up from the .030" until I could see the effect, not of Richard's .010" (unless that's not what he meant) but of a balance paper .001" or .002".   The point was not how it would feel to a pianist, but how precise/consistent we can be in defining the measurements we quote.   What does it mean if one tech's .030" is another's .025 or .035?   

Additional things to overthink:
- aside from string envelope, what are the constraints of let-off proximity?  
- what is the envelope of let-off effectiveness? iow, how far from string before response is noticeably compromised?
- if increasing letoff distance, are we more concerned about the loss of pianissimo control or of power?
- do we fine-tune our blow distance/hammer line when we've adjusted our bore distances to irregular string levels, or do we use a compromise hammer line? 

------------------------------
David Skolnik [RPT]
Hastings-on-Hudson NY
(917) 589-2625

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2026 12:48
From: David Love
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

That's too much aftertouch (.049").  

I always set aftertouch last and usually .030.  I do this with a punching of the same thickness, insert under the key and add or subtract punchings until the hammer just lets off with little pressure on the key at the bottom of the stroke (without front punching compression). 

Aftertouch is a requirement to insure jack escapement from the knuckle. It's not a distance that pianists will necessarily feel.  What they will feel is the consequence of too little (hammer bobbling) or too much (excessive key dip--perhaps).  I aim for uniform aftertouch. The formula is quite simple.  Too much and pianists will have a harder time controlling pianissimo as the hammer may not get close enough to the string on ppp blows.  Too little let-off and you risk double striking.  If you want to set uniform key dip, that's fine, but then to get uniform aftertouch you will have to vary the blow distance.  I'm ok with that, within reason.  

Pianists (many) are sensitive to key dip and so the absolute value and uniformity, without being excessive, is important.  Many who are obsessed with low inertia actions can run into difficulty because if they are achieving that largely through low action ratios they will have to have deeper key dip.  That can be a problem.  On the other hand, if you want a low inertia but also want heavier hammers, you will be stuck with deeper key dip or shorter blow distance. 

Sometimes you have to make compromises somewhere if the pianist is focusing on a specific regulation spec. Recall that the standard for key dip has changed as action ratios have gotten lower.  Someone used to a 9 mm key dip might be troubled by 10 mm which is more the current standard (probably 10-10.5 mm).

The reality is you will almost always have to compromise something to get the specs you want because everything you do affects other things.  Action ratios are the primary determinant of how the action can be regulated.  I would say let-off is not compromisable for reasons given.  Action ratios are determined by the set up of the action.  Blow distance, key dip, aftertouch can all be modified to achieve what is the most important for your pianist. Sometimes you will be altering more than one of those.  But you have to pay the piper somewhere.  

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320

Original Message:
Sent: 01-19-2026 19:09
From: Joseph Burros
Subject: Refining Key Dip for accurate Aftertouch when Letoff differs in the Bass, Tenor, and Treble sections

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

My understanding is that 1/16" (or 2mm) is not actually the optimum spec, but rather one that includes a safety factor to accommodate humidity fluctuations affecting both the soundboard and the action itself. (Safety from blocking on the strings). So really, the theoretical ideal is "as close as tou can get it without interference"...but that's a concert quality goal rather than a home environment goal. 

FYI, I generally will make my final adjustments in aftertouch by slightly varying dip (at least as of this writing). 

Peter Grey Piano Doctor 

(note: this may be superceded by information in Joe Burros last post, but...)

"Paying the piper" is a much safer framing than "burying the bodies".
I've used David L's method of measuring aftertouch for long enough that I thought that I had come up with it on my own, but that rarely happens in real life.    I DID introduce my own obsessiveness into the process by challenging my self to determine where 'escapement' actually begins and ends.  One determinant would be, as Steven Rosenthal referenced, the fore and aft position of the jack relative to the knuckle.  Another would be the diameter (and intact profile) of the knuckle itself.  David L refered to avoiding front punching compression, but, even if not actually employed in the action itself, I found it much more revealing to use the white hammer felt front punchings (was PianoForte... don't know if Dale still has them) to totally eliminate the compression variable.  Aftertouch, as a discrete measurement, would begin at the end of escapement.
But no, that wasn't enough for me.  I wanted to know how much less than .030" would still permit escapement to happen, so I worked backwards, building back up from the .030" until I could see the effect, not of Richard's .010" (unless that's not what he meant) but of a balance paper .001" or .002".   The point was not how it would feel to a pianist, but how precise/consistent we can be in defining the measurements we quote.   What does it mean if one tech's .030" is another's .025 or .035?   

Additional things to overthink:
- aside from string envelope, what are the constraints of let-off proximity?  
- what is the envelope of let-off effectiveness? iow, how far from string before response is noticeably compromised?
- if increasing letoff distance, are we more concerned about the loss of pianissimo control or of power?
- do we fine-tune our blow distance/hammer line when we've adjusted our bore distances to irregular string levels, or do we use a compromise hammer line? 

That's too much aftertouch (.049").  

I always set aftertouch last and usually .030.  I do this with a punching of the same thickness, insert under the key and add or subtract punchings until the hammer just lets off with little pressure on the key at the bottom of the stroke (without front punching compression). 

Aftertouch is a requirement to insure jack escapement from the knuckle. It's not a distance that pianists will necessarily feel.  What they will feel is the consequence of too little (hammer bobbling) or too much (excessive key dip--perhaps).  I aim for uniform aftertouch. The formula is quite simple.  Too much and pianists will have a harder time controlling pianissimo as the hammer may not get close enough to the string on ppp blows.  Too little let-off and you risk double striking.  If you want to set uniform key dip, that's fine, but then to get uniform aftertouch you will have to vary the blow distance.  I'm ok with that, within reason.  

Pianists (many) are sensitive to key dip and so the absolute value and uniformity, without being excessive, is important.  Many who are obsessed with low inertia actions can run into difficulty because if they are achieving that largely through low action ratios they will have to have deeper key dip.  That can be a problem.  On the other hand, if you want a low inertia but also want heavier hammers, you will be stuck with deeper key dip or shorter blow distance. 

Sometimes you have to make compromises somewhere if the pianist is focusing on a specific regulation spec. Recall that the standard for key dip has changed as action ratios have gotten lower.  Someone used to a 9 mm key dip might be troubled by 10 mm which is more the current standard (probably 10-10.5 mm).

The reality is you will almost always have to compromise something to get the specs you want because everything you do affects other things.  Action ratios are the primary determinant of how the action can be regulated.  I would say let-off is not compromisable for reasons given.  Action ratios are determined by the set up of the action.  Blow distance, key dip, aftertouch can all be modified to achieve what is the most important for your pianist. Sometimes you will be altering more than one of those.  But you have to pay the piper somewhere.  

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

(note: this may be superceded by information in Joe Burros last post, but...)

"Paying the piper" is a much safer framing than "burying the bodies".
I've used David L's method of measuring aftertouch for long enough that I thought that I had come up with it on my own, but that rarely happens in real life.    I DID introduce my own obsessiveness into the process by challenging my self to determine where 'escapement' actually begins and ends.  One determinant would be, as Steven Rosenthal referenced, the fore and aft position of the jack relative to the knuckle.  Another would be the diameter (and intact profile) of the knuckle itself.  David L refered to avoiding front punching compression, but, even if not actually employed in the action itself, I found it much more revealing to use the white hammer felt front punchings (was PianoForte... don't know if Dale still has them) to totally eliminate the compression variable.  Aftertouch, as a discrete measurement, would begin at the end of escapement.
But no, that wasn't enough for me.  I wanted to know how much less than .030" would still permit escapement to happen, so I worked backwards, building back up from the .030" until I could see the effect, not of Richard's .010" (unless that's not what he meant) but of a balance paper .001" or .002".   The point was not how it would feel to a pianist, but how precise/consistent we can be in defining the measurements we quote.   What does it mean if one tech's .030" is another's .025 or .035?   

Additional things to overthink:
- aside from string envelope, what are the constraints of let-off proximity?  
- what is the envelope of let-off effectiveness? iow, how far from string before response is noticeably compromised?
- if increasing letoff distance, are we more concerned about the loss of pianissimo control or of power?
- do we fine-tune our blow distance/hammer line when we've adjusted our bore distances to irregular string levels, or do we use a compromise hammer line? 

That's too much aftertouch (.049").  

I always set aftertouch last and usually .030.  I do this with a punching of the same thickness, insert under the key and add or subtract punchings until the hammer just lets off with little pressure on the key at the bottom of the stroke (without front punching compression). 

Aftertouch is a requirement to insure jack escapement from the knuckle. It's not a distance that pianists will necessarily feel.  What they will feel is the consequence of too little (hammer bobbling) or too much (excessive key dip--perhaps).  I aim for uniform aftertouch. The formula is quite simple.  Too much and pianists will have a harder time controlling pianissimo as the hammer may not get close enough to the string on ppp blows.  Too little let-off and you risk double striking.  If you want to set uniform key dip, that's fine, but then to get uniform aftertouch you will have to vary the blow distance.  I'm ok with that, within reason.  

Pianists (many) are sensitive to key dip and so the absolute value and uniformity, without being excessive, is important.  Many who are obsessed with low inertia actions can run into difficulty because if they are achieving that largely through low action ratios they will have to have deeper key dip.  That can be a problem.  On the other hand, if you want a low inertia but also want heavier hammers, you will be stuck with deeper key dip or shorter blow distance. 

Sometimes you have to make compromises somewhere if the pianist is focusing on a specific regulation spec. Recall that the standard for key dip has changed as action ratios have gotten lower.  Someone used to a 9 mm key dip might be troubled by 10 mm which is more the current standard (probably 10-10.5 mm).

The reality is you will almost always have to compromise something to get the specs you want because everything you do affects other things.  Action ratios are the primary determinant of how the action can be regulated.  I would say let-off is not compromisable for reasons given.  Action ratios are determined by the set up of the action.  Blow distance, key dip, aftertouch can all be modified to achieve what is the most important for your pianist. Sometimes you will be altering more than one of those.  But you have to pay the piper somewhere.  

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

David Skolnick: What an interesting experiment you carried out with lowering the amount of Aftertouch to the absolute minimum. Can you expound a little more on the lessons you learned from doing this experiment? Did it change the way you approach setting Aftertouch or Dip? Thanks!

(note: this may be superceded by information in Joe Burros last post, but...)

"Paying the piper" is a much safer framing than "burying the bodies".
I've used David L's method of measuring aftertouch for long enough that I thought that I had come up with it on my own, but that rarely happens in real life.    I DID introduce my own obsessiveness into the process by challenging my self to determine where 'escapement' actually begins and ends.  One determinant would be, as Steven Rosenthal referenced, the fore and aft position of the jack relative to the knuckle.  Another would be the diameter (and intact profile) of the knuckle itself.  David L refered to avoiding front punching compression, but, even if not actually employed in the action itself, I found it much more revealing to use the white hammer felt front punchings (was PianoForte... don't know if Dale still has them) to totally eliminate the compression variable.  Aftertouch, as a discrete measurement, would begin at the end of escapement.
But no, that wasn't enough for me.  I wanted to know how much less than .030" would still permit escapement to happen, so I worked backwards, building back up from the .030" until I could see the effect, not of Richard's .010" (unless that's not what he meant) but of a balance paper .001" or .002".   The point was not how it would feel to a pianist, but how precise/consistent we can be in defining the measurements we quote.   What does it mean if one tech's .030" is another's .025 or .035?   

Additional things to overthink:
- aside from string envelope, what are the constraints of let-off proximity?  
- what is the envelope of let-off effectiveness? iow, how far from string before response is noticeably compromised?
- if increasing letoff distance, are we more concerned about the loss of pianissimo control or of power?
- do we fine-tune our blow distance/hammer line when we've adjusted our bore distances to irregular string levels, or do we use a compromise hammer line? 

That's too much aftertouch (.049").  

I always set aftertouch last and usually .030.  I do this with a punching of the same thickness, insert under the key and add or subtract punchings until the hammer just lets off with little pressure on the key at the bottom of the stroke (without front punching compression). 

Aftertouch is a requirement to insure jack escapement from the knuckle. It's not a distance that pianists will necessarily feel.  What they will feel is the consequence of too little (hammer bobbling) or too much (excessive key dip--perhaps).  I aim for uniform aftertouch. The formula is quite simple.  Too much and pianists will have a harder time controlling pianissimo as the hammer may not get close enough to the string on ppp blows.  Too little let-off and you risk double striking.  If you want to set uniform key dip, that's fine, but then to get uniform aftertouch you will have to vary the blow distance.  I'm ok with that, within reason.  

Pianists (many) are sensitive to key dip and so the absolute value and uniformity, without being excessive, is important.  Many who are obsessed with low inertia actions can run into difficulty because if they are achieving that largely through low action ratios they will have to have deeper key dip.  That can be a problem.  On the other hand, if you want a low inertia but also want heavier hammers, you will be stuck with deeper key dip or shorter blow distance. 

Sometimes you have to make compromises somewhere if the pianist is focusing on a specific regulation spec. Recall that the standard for key dip has changed as action ratios have gotten lower.  Someone used to a 9 mm key dip might be troubled by 10 mm which is more the current standard (probably 10-10.5 mm).

The reality is you will almost always have to compromise something to get the specs you want because everything you do affects other things.  Action ratios are the primary determinant of how the action can be regulated.  I would say let-off is not compromisable for reasons given.  Action ratios are determined by the set up of the action.  Blow distance, key dip, aftertouch can all be modified to achieve what is the most important for your pianist. Sometimes you will be altering more than one of those.  But you have to pay the piper somewhere.  

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

Greetings,

    If all parts were perfect I could get consistent aftertouch with consistent dip after all other regulation steps were done.  I have seen this on some of the Yamaha and Kawai pianos, but never on a hand-built action.  Like others, I vary things to keep aftertouch even, but maybe add some obsessive things along the way.  For the top of the line work, I will set a consistent .390" dip with a consistent blow that generally allows .040" AT. All front rail pins will have a blue and pink punching at the bottom of the stack and I use Crescendo punchings.   Then, after final let-off is done I will measure the aftertouch with a .040" spacer on the punching stack.  This is where a very conscious sense of touch , as Richard West describes, can make the artistic result.  If we concentrate all the variables in AT in one decision, it will be in our fingers as we press 88 times with equal pressure.  There are two ways to do this; use .045" and press harder to be consistent, or simply go Zen and trust your fingers to know how hard you are pressing when you feel the jack fall. I think most of us regulators have far more sensitive touch than pianists if we learn to trust it.  If I have to depart from the preset dip by more than .010" I will alter blow.  If I have to alter blow more than .050" or so I go looking for what's wrong. (It is usually a capstan line or a knuckle deviation).

What I found is that by spreading the error between blow and dip I can get my even aftertouch without getting too far out of line.  Accepting a ragged hammer-line may be easier for those that have accepted a ragged drop that results from synching the jack and drop, but if we are going for maximum performance, some cosmetic compromise may have to be.  Once this 'custom' keyboard is played and perhaps the overly-neurotic pianist suggests slightly more aftertouch, rather than a chore, simply deepen the whole thing by either a pink or blue or both.  You have three additional depths the whole keyboard can be set to by just tearing out the punchings that give you the needed change. 

    Chris Robinson presented the aftertouch priority method many years ago in St. Louis and I went home and reset the keyboard on an action I had just delivered to a Steinway artist the month before.  She immediately noticed an evenness that wasn't there before, and I didn't have to change much.  Small things are big to sensitive people. ( Oh, Don't forget to recheck the back-checks after refining the dip, then your springs are going to be a little different so you might need to go over the mortise height, then redo the blow, which gets you back to maybe changing the dip and then you have to......

Regards, 

David Skolnick: What an interesting experiment you carried out with lowering the amount of Aftertouch to the absolute minimum. Can you expound a little more on the lessons you learned from doing this experiment? Did it change the way you approach setting Aftertouch or Dip? Thanks!

(note: this may be superceded by information in Joe Burros last post, but...)

"Paying the piper" is a much safer framing than "burying the bodies".
I've used David L's method of measuring aftertouch for long enough that I thought that I had come up with it on my own, but that rarely happens in real life.    I DID introduce my own obsessiveness into the process by challenging my self to determine where 'escapement' actually begins and ends.  One determinant would be, as Steven Rosenthal referenced, the fore and aft position of the jack relative to the knuckle.  Another would be the diameter (and intact profile) of the knuckle itself.  David L refered to avoiding front punching compression, but, even if not actually employed in the action itself, I found it much more revealing to use the white hammer felt front punchings (was PianoForte... don't know if Dale still has them) to totally eliminate the compression variable.  Aftertouch, as a discrete measurement, would begin at the end of escapement.
But no, that wasn't enough for me.  I wanted to know how much less than .030" would still permit escapement to happen, so I worked backwards, building back up from the .030" until I could see the effect, not of Richard's .010" (unless that's not what he meant) but of a balance paper .001" or .002".   The point was not how it would feel to a pianist, but how precise/consistent we can be in defining the measurements we quote.   What does it mean if one tech's .030" is another's .025 or .035?   

Additional things to overthink:
- aside from string envelope, what are the constraints of let-off proximity?  
- what is the envelope of let-off effectiveness? iow, how far from string before response is noticeably compromised?
- if increasing letoff distance, are we more concerned about the loss of pianissimo control or of power?
- do we fine-tune our blow distance/hammer line when we've adjusted our bore distances to irregular string levels, or do we use a compromise hammer line? 

That's too much aftertouch (.049").  

I always set aftertouch last and usually .030.  I do this with a punching of the same thickness, insert under the key and add or subtract punchings until the hammer just lets off with little pressure on the key at the bottom of the stroke (without front punching compression). 

Aftertouch is a requirement to insure jack escapement from the knuckle. It's not a distance that pianists will necessarily feel.  What they will feel is the consequence of too little (hammer bobbling) or too much (excessive key dip--perhaps).  I aim for uniform aftertouch. The formula is quite simple.  Too much and pianists will have a harder time controlling pianissimo as the hammer may not get close enough to the string on ppp blows.  Too little let-off and you risk double striking.  If you want to set uniform key dip, that's fine, but then to get uniform aftertouch you will have to vary the blow distance.  I'm ok with that, within reason.  

Pianists (many) are sensitive to key dip and so the absolute value and uniformity, without being excessive, is important.  Many who are obsessed with low inertia actions can run into difficulty because if they are achieving that largely through low action ratios they will have to have deeper key dip.  That can be a problem.  On the other hand, if you want a low inertia but also want heavier hammers, you will be stuck with deeper key dip or shorter blow distance. 

Sometimes you have to make compromises somewhere if the pianist is focusing on a specific regulation spec. Recall that the standard for key dip has changed as action ratios have gotten lower.  Someone used to a 9 mm key dip might be troubled by 10 mm which is more the current standard (probably 10-10.5 mm).

The reality is you will almost always have to compromise something to get the specs you want because everything you do affects other things.  Action ratios are the primary determinant of how the action can be regulated.  I would say let-off is not compromisable for reasons given.  Action ratios are determined by the set up of the action.  Blow distance, key dip, aftertouch can all be modified to achieve what is the most important for your pianist. Sometimes you will be altering more than one of those.  But you have to pay the piper somewhere.  

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

This is a comment on the original post. Joe - I, like many here, prioritize aftertouch (as you do also). I am somewhat shocked however that no one has commented on your description of the effect that increased or decreased let-off distance in the various sections of the string scale will have on key dip when aftertouch is the same on all keys. Using the tenor as a reference spec, if let-off is increased in the bass, the key will propel the hammer toward the string a lesser distance before let-off. Therefore, key dip will need to be less in the bass when blow and aftertouch are the same - dip will need to decrease as let-off increases. Of course, as one would expect, the opposite is true in the treble (again, using the tenor as the reference spec). If let-off is decreased in the treble, the key will propel the hammer toward the string a greater distance before let-off. Therefore, key dip will need to be greater in the treble when blow and aftertouch are the same - dip will need to increase as let-off decreases.

Or am I having a giant brain-fart and only embarrassing myself with my post here?!?!?!?!?  I know I am correct, but at the same time I feel like I MUST be wrong!

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

Terry,

As has been mentioned in different ways, if we want one aspect of regulation that affects after-touch to remain constant, another/others must vary. As let-off changes from section to section, in order to keep both key dip and after touch constant, blow distance must change. So, in that scenario, as let-off gets closer to or farther from the string, blow must do the same.

Like you, I am certain I've got this right, yet still wondering what I'm missing ;-).

Alan

This is a comment on the original post. Joe - I, like many here, prioritize aftertouch (as you do also). I am somewhat shocked however that no one has commented on your description of the effect that increased or decreased let-off distance in the various sections of the string scale will have on key dip when aftertouch is the same on all keys. Using the tenor as a reference spec, if let-off is increased in the bass, the key will propel the hammer toward the string a lesser distance before let-off. Therefore, key dip will need to be less in the bass when blow and aftertouch are the same - dip will need to decrease as let-off increases. Of course, as one would expect, the opposite is true in the treble (again, using the tenor as the reference spec). If let-off is decreased in the treble, the key will propel the hammer toward the string a greater distance before let-off. Therefore, key dip will need to be greater in the treble when blow and aftertouch are the same - dip will need to increase as let-off decreases.

Or am I having a giant brain-fart and only embarrassing myself with my post here?!?!?!?!?  I know I am correct, but at the same time I feel like I MUST be wrong!

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

This is a comment on the original post. Joe - I, like many here, prioritize aftertouch (as you do also). I am somewhat shocked however that no one has commented on your description of the effect that increased or decreased let-off distance in the various sections of the string scale will have on key dip when aftertouch is the same on all keys. Using the tenor as a reference spec, if let-off is increased in the bass, the key will propel the hammer toward the string a lesser distance before let-off. Therefore, key dip will need to be less in the bass when blow and aftertouch are the same - dip will need to decrease as let-off increases. Of course, as one would expect, the opposite is true in the treble (again, using the tenor as the reference spec). If let-off is decreased in the treble, the key will propel the hammer toward the string a greater distance before let-off. Therefore, key dip will need to be greater in the treble when blow and aftertouch are the same - dip will need to increase as let-off decreases.

Or am I having a giant brain-fart and only embarrassing myself with my post here?!?!?!?!?  I know I am correct, but at the same time I feel like I MUST be wrong!

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

Hi Terry,

Yes, you have it right. It looks like I had the change in Dip backwards in my original question of this post. 

I wrote:

"As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm."

The correct approach is the way you said it. Terry.

"...key dip will need to be less in the bass when blow and aftertouch are the same - dip will need to decrease as let-off increases. Of course, as one would expect, the opposite is true in the treble... key dip will need to be greater in the treble when blow and aftertouch are the same - dip will need to increase as let-off decreases."

This is a comment on the original post. Joe - I, like many here, prioritize aftertouch (as you do also). I am somewhat shocked however that no one has commented on your description of the effect that increased or decreased let-off distance in the various sections of the string scale will have on key dip when aftertouch is the same on all keys. Using the tenor as a reference spec, if let-off is increased in the bass, the key will propel the hammer toward the string a lesser distance before let-off. Therefore, key dip will need to be less in the bass when blow and aftertouch are the same - dip will need to decrease as let-off increases. Of course, as one would expect, the opposite is true in the treble (again, using the tenor as the reference spec). If let-off is decreased in the treble, the key will propel the hammer toward the string a greater distance before let-off. Therefore, key dip will need to be greater in the treble when blow and aftertouch are the same - dip will need to increase as let-off decreases.

Or am I having a giant brain-fart and only embarrassing myself with my post here?!?!?!?!?  I know I am correct, but at the same time I feel like I MUST be wrong!

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

Mr Burros et.al.

One thing I haven't seen mentioned is the variability of string height across the compass of many instruments. The SD 10 I'm working on at the moment has a 5mm difference in string height from note 1 to note 20. If I were to keep blow distance rigidly identical through the section the I'd have to make larger compromises in the hammer line than I'm comfortable with. I also wouldn't want to have a 4mm let off at note 20 to compensate for the increased blow distance assuming I made a straight hammer line. Touch depth is where I feel like I have the best chance for a compromise to happen that will go unnoticed by the artist provided I keep the after touch even. Steinway pianos from the 20th century can have a 3mm crown between the first agraffe in the tenor and the last agraffe before the capo. And then one might find another couple of mm difference from the beginning of the capo section to note 88. As Mr.love has mentioned sometimes the capstan line is altered in order to compensate with the key output arm for the decreased string height while allowing a consistent touch depth. I prefer to keep a relatively straight hammer line, compromise touch depth as necessary and keep the after touch as consistent as possible. I've had numerous artists call out inconsistent after touch but almost never the actual key travel provided it's within normal parameters.

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

Hi Karl,

Thanks for your comments. I recently moved the capstan line on a Steinway O in order to raise the action ratio. The original capstan line was not straight, veering off as it went into the treble, similar to what you show in the pictures you posted. I did not realize that the original capstan line may have been installed on a curve on purpose. From note 70 on this piano the string height is 190.6mm and then gradually goes down to 187.2 to note 88, a difference of 3.4mm in string height. When I installed the capstans in their new location, I made the line straight with no curve in it. In order to compensate with the lowering string height in the treble, I will do a custom bore on each hammer, so I retain the proper blow distance while having the same action ratio across all keys. 

I do have a 1949 Steinway L that I am going to work on next. This piano as a 6mm variation in the string height. I am not sure how I am going to deal with that problem. And I am not sure that altering the bore distance in the hammers by 6mm is even feasible. Any thoughts?

Mr Burros et.al.

One thing I haven't seen mentioned is the variability of string height across the compass of many instruments. The SD 10 I'm working on at the moment has a 5mm difference in string height from note 1 to note 20. If I were to keep blow distance rigidly identical through the section the I'd have to make larger compromises in the hammer line than I'm comfortable with. I also wouldn't want to have a 4mm let off at note 20 to compensate for the increased blow distance assuming I made a straight hammer line. Touch depth is where I feel like I have the best chance for a compromise to happen that will go unnoticed by the artist provided I keep the after touch even. Steinway pianos from the 20th century can have a 3mm crown between the first agraffe in the tenor and the last agraffe before the capo. And then one might find another couple of mm difference from the beginning of the capo section to note 88. As Mr.love has mentioned sometimes the capstan line is altered in order to compensate with the key output arm for the decreased string height while allowing a consistent touch depth. I prefer to keep a relatively straight hammer line, compromise touch depth as necessary and keep the after touch as consistent as possible. I've had numerous artists call out inconsistent after touch but almost never the actual key travel provided it's within normal parameters.

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

Hi Joe,

Some hammer manufacturers offer "universal" hammers, which the installer cuts to length according to the tail length they want plus the correct bore distance below the crown. Don't think I've ever tried to do 6 mm before, but something approaching that may be possible. Of course, with hammers varying in length that much, one must keep an eye on the mass of the hammers at the extremes of string height.

Best,

Alan

Hi Karl,

Thanks for your comments. I recently moved the capstan line on a Steinway O in order to raise the action ratio. The original capstan line was not straight, veering off as it went into the treble, similar to what you show in the pictures you posted. I did not realize that the original capstan line may have been installed on a curve on purpose. From note 70 on this piano the string height is 190.6mm and then gradually goes down to 187.2 to note 88, a difference of 3.4mm in string height. When I installed the capstans in their new location, I made the line straight with no curve in it. In order to compensate with the lowering string height in the treble, I will do a custom bore on each hammer, so I retain the proper blow distance while having the same action ratio across all keys. 

I do have a 1949 Steinway L that I am going to work on next. This piano as a 6mm variation in the string height. I am not sure how I am going to deal with that problem. And I am not sure that altering the bore distance in the hammers by 6mm is even feasible. Any thoughts?

Mr Burros et.al.

One thing I haven't seen mentioned is the variability of string height across the compass of many instruments. The SD 10 I'm working on at the moment has a 5mm difference in string height from note 1 to note 20. If I were to keep blow distance rigidly identical through the section the I'd have to make larger compromises in the hammer line than I'm comfortable with. I also wouldn't want to have a 4mm let off at note 20 to compensate for the increased blow distance assuming I made a straight hammer line. Touch depth is where I feel like I have the best chance for a compromise to happen that will go unnoticed by the artist provided I keep the after touch even. Steinway pianos from the 20th century can have a 3mm crown between the first agraffe in the tenor and the last agraffe before the capo. And then one might find another couple of mm difference from the beginning of the capo section to note 88. As Mr.love has mentioned sometimes the capstan line is altered in order to compensate with the key output arm for the decreased string height while allowing a consistent touch depth. I prefer to keep a relatively straight hammer line, compromise touch depth as necessary and keep the after touch as consistent as possible. I've had numerous artists call out inconsistent after touch but almost never the actual key travel provided it's within normal parameters.

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------

Hi Karl,

Thanks for your comments. I recently moved the capstan line on a Steinway O in order to raise the action ratio. The original capstan line was not straight, veering off as it went into the treble, similar to what you show in the pictures you posted. I did not realize that the original capstan line may have been installed on a curve on purpose. From note 70 on this piano the string height is 190.6mm and then gradually goes down to 187.2 to note 88, a difference of 3.4mm in string height. When I installed the capstans in their new location, I made the line straight with no curve in it. In order to compensate with the lowering string height in the treble, I will do a custom bore on each hammer, so I retain the proper blow distance while having the same action ratio across all keys. 

I do have a 1949 Steinway L that I am going to work on next. This piano as a 6mm variation in the string height. I am not sure how I am going to deal with that problem. And I am not sure that altering the bore distance in the hammers by 6mm is even feasible. Any thoughts?

Mr Burros et.al.

One thing I haven't seen mentioned is the variability of string height across the compass of many instruments. The SD 10 I'm working on at the moment has a 5mm difference in string height from note 1 to note 20. If I were to keep blow distance rigidly identical through the section the I'd have to make larger compromises in the hammer line than I'm comfortable with. I also wouldn't want to have a 4mm let off at note 20 to compensate for the increased blow distance assuming I made a straight hammer line. Touch depth is where I feel like I have the best chance for a compromise to happen that will go unnoticed by the artist provided I keep the after touch even. Steinway pianos from the 20th century can have a 3mm crown between the first agraffe in the tenor and the last agraffe before the capo. And then one might find another couple of mm difference from the beginning of the capo section to note 88. As Mr.love has mentioned sometimes the capstan line is altered in order to compensate with the key output arm for the decreased string height while allowing a consistent touch depth. I prefer to keep a relatively straight hammer line, compromise touch depth as necessary and keep the after touch as consistent as possible. I've had numerous artists call out inconsistent after touch but almost never the actual key travel provided it's within normal parameters.

I'd like to get some feedback about my approach to attaining even Aftertouch across all keys, even when the amount of Letoff differs between the bass and treble strings. I am setting the Letoff as close as reasonably possible on all keys, so that means that the Letoff will be further from the keys in the low bass, because of more movement in vibrating bass strings, and much closer in the high treble, because string vibration movement is less as you go up the keyboard.

Now, let's say that Letoff in the bass section is 1/32" or 0.79mm further from the string than the treble section. I am wanting an Aftertouch of 1.25mm on all keys. Obviously if my Key Dip remains the same across all keys and my hammer blow distance is the same across all keys, my Aftertouch will be less in the bass and more in the treble section because of the differences in Letoff.

My solution, after consulting with more experienced technicians and reading Journal articles is to vary the key dip across the entire keyboard, so that I can achieve the same Aftertouch on all keys. My understanding right now is that experienced players will not notice small differences in Key Dip but will definitely notice differences in Aftertouch.

I will first start in the middle of the keyboard setting my preferred Key Dip and Aftertouch. As I work my way down toward the bass section my Key Dip will become greater in order to compensate for the increased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

As I work my way up toward the high treble section my Key Dip will lessen in order to compensate for the decreased Letoff distance. My Aftertouch will remain a constant 1.25mm. 

I welcome any feedback on this approach and any suggestions on how to approach this differently. 

Thank you!

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
https://fminewengland.wixsite.com/fmi-new-england
------------------------------