I posted this last week on the Technician's Forum and got one response, from a non-technician,(thanks Horowitzian)!! I think that speaks volumes to this industry's lack of interest in anything that breaks with tradition. Too bad, really. Anyway, I'll try once more:

If you are effectively moving the balance rail, then how are you dealing with front rail issues? You don't have much "slush" fore and aft with which to play so to speak before you get into interference issues with the front pins and key cauls. If you are moving the balance rail, will you not also get into backcheck issues fairly quickly?

I believe that David is installing magnets on the keys. He is using a version of Hans Velo's MBA action. He worked with Hans Velo last year to come up with a modified design.
I had telephone conversations with David Stanwood a few months ago when we were having work done on a Bosendorfer and he offered to put this modification on the piano. We chose to have the normal Stanwood process and it turned out great. My wife really likes the result.

She also has played two pianos with the MBA action and really liked them. We can order Petrof pianos with this MBA action. Petrof also has another magnetic action which they call Magnetic Accelerated Action.

So David is now offering another option for retrofitting a grand piano with a magnetic action. His option also has the advantage in that he works with a local tech to improve and optimise several parts of the action with all of his custom design work.

Hi John,
Good question. That's actually the genius of the device. While the effect is as if the balance rail was mobile, it actually remains stationary and is not altered at all. There is a little "gadget", as David likes to call it, that slides over the balance pin and rides on top of the balance rail punchings and directly under the key. On this "gadget" we epoxied two small cubes of felt on either side of the balance pin. The "gadget" is attached to an aluminum plate directly in front of the balance rail. This plate is attached to a device that moves it forward and back using two dials mounted into the front edge of the keyframe, just behind the keyslip. The "gadgets" are strategically connected to the moving plate so that they slide forward and back under the key. This movement is relatively slight, but the change in touchweight is dramatic. By effectively altering the fulcrum of the lever system, you make these changes without affecting, in any way, the regulation, front rail or backchecks, since the keys and everything they are attached to, remain the same.

So has David come up with another system beside a magnetic system that he offered to us last winter?

Hi Gary,
While you are correct that David offers his own, improved, version of the Velo Magnets as an option for his Precision Touch Design, this innovation that I'm describing is completely separate from that, and does not use the magnets. In fact, I was originally going to install this Adjustable Leverage Action in my Mason Concert Grand, but we realized we could not, since the magnet rail would have interfered with the function of it.

I think this might be confusing you. This system I've just described serves a completely different function from the Precision Touch Design, (PTD), with Magnetic Assist that you had installed. The PTD analyzes weight, friction and balance components of your piano's action in order to redesign the geometry to optimize performance. By making this analysis, David can determine where changes need to be made to adjust the weight, leverage and friction in order to optimize action performance in each piano. The Adjustable Leverage Action was created to allow one piano to be able to accommodate any pianist's preference when it comes to playing a "light", "medium" or "heavy" action. The mechanism changes the balance point of the key, and, by doing so, can change the action ratio by 0.6. it's important to understand that this can be done instantaneously, by means of turning two dials. Think of the implications in performance settings!!!

Hey, no problem good mate!

The idea sounds really cool to me. I hope you guys can get it broader acceptance.

Cost and availability?

Several years ago a top tech in our area dropped off a customer's S&S B in our shop for our evaluationa thoughts. He had just installed the mag-lev action thing with the magnets. It came with a lever tool that could be applied on several points across the front rail to adjust the touch.

My thoughts at the time were that this had very limited application for the player/owner with a pocket protector and a propeller on his head. I could only imagine the typical piano owner completely screwing up and consistence in their pianos touch. It ranked right up there with giving each new piano owner the begining piano tool set. OMG!

About the same week, Kawai delivered our first 48" (may have been 52" can't remember) upright with their variable touch system. A lever that internally altered the touch. At least this was uniform across the keyboard. The thing never worked right and locked up and binded all the time.

Years ago I remember asking a Mercedes dealer about the adjustable steering colum feature on most US cars at that time. He ansered that it was a factory admission of guilt that they could not engineer proper ergonomic placement of the steering wheel (very German). Today all Mercedes have adjustable steering wheels.

CC2, tell us more.
The adjustable MBA system allows the pianist to adjust the key weightings. And Marty, just like the adjustable steering wheel, nothing is damaged when people adjust it. It is just some dials that can quickly be set back to where it was before. If you read Hans Velo's website you can learn more about the inertia problem that bigger pianos have. Pianos with larger hammers require more effort to play. There is more mass to move up and down. Piano keys have lead weights added to the keys which add more mass which has to be moved up and down. So the effort to play the larger piano loudly is much more than to play a small piano loudly. Plus keys with larger hammers, bass keys, require more work than keys with small hammers and small lead weights, treble keys.

This is simple physics. Techs measure the weight to push down a key very slowly and the weight that a key returns very slowly. This is much different than the effort required to play quickly and loudly or even quietly. Magnetic actions eliminate or reduce the amount of lead weights in the keys. Thus there is less mass to move up and down, therefore less work to be done by the pianist with their fingers. Plus the actions will play quicker as the keys will return quicker. The MBA action allows the leverage ratio to be easily and quickly adjusted to suit the pianist. Plus the pianist may want a different ratio at different times just like you adjust your car seat and steering wheel as you get tired or drive in different situations.

So CC2, tell us more of David's thinking. How is this adjustable leverage device better or different from his magnetic system. Is it more adjustable than his version of the MBA? Does it accomplish the same things as the full MBA system? About what are the costs?

By the way we did not install David Stanwood's magnetic system. His whole system would cost $10,000 and the Custom Design Touch cost less than half that much. By the way, the costs vary as do all work by any tech on anything. Our local Stanwood certified tech set the price for his work.

Gary,
I understand piano physics. I have been working on them for over 35 years. Bigger pianos have longer keys usually to compensate for the leverage necessary to drive bigger hammers driving longer but thinner strings. Larger pianos have a bigger speaking voice and deliver more sound for less effort at the key.

I am not a Nihilist when it comes to piano inovation. I am sceptical of simplistic explainations in support of radical approaches. I am also a retail realist when it comes to what is marketable for the general public. Clearly, this stuff is not for everyone and has a limited esoteric appeal for those who want to tweak an already good thing. Case in point was the proud new owner of a Mason & Hamlin BB recently who took a brand new world class grand piano and had the bridges Wappenized and the action Stanwoodized. Not something I would have done with a new BB, but he is thrilled.

A race car driver and his owner will gladly spend another $50k to eke out another few horsepower to give them that competitive edge. To the very few, another $10k for a bionic action is nothing.

Thanks Marty.
I know that you are more of a piano expert than me. And you have been at this much longer than me. However I have a degree in engineering and come at this from a different background.

I wrote so much to explain what so many others who will read this thread will need to have written so that they will understand the discussion.
By they way, it is my understanding that large grand pianos with long keys, large hammers, etc do require more work to push that greatter mass up and down. Yes the leverage of a long key does make the same down weight as a smaller piano, but more effort is required to move the larger keys and hammers, just like a bigger see saw with a larger person requires more work than a small see saw moving a smaller person. And the faster that you move the person the harder that you must work. This is the equations of mass and velocity and inertia.

Hey Dan, The new system sounds terrific even if I don't know what you're talking about. So when do I get to try it??

They work on different principles to achieve different results. The magnets used by David when added to his Precision Touch Design are individually adjusted on each key by the technician to assist with the counterbalance force required to move the back end of the key up. As you have already correctly stated, this is normally accomplished with lead weights, which add mass, and thus increased inertial resistance, to the dynamics of the key. The magnets allow you to greatly reduce this inertial resistance, but cannot be easily adjusted "on the fly". The Adjustable Leverage Action works easily, quickly and efficiently by simply changing the fulcrum point of the key forward or back. It can easily be adjusted by the player in about 30 seconds.

Hi Lee,
It really is terrific, and you are welcome to come by anytime to try it out. Give me a call.
Dan

John Pels asks:


Mine was the second prototype, the first being installed on David's own Mason "A". He is currently working on a third...a Steinway "D" for Brandeis University with an accelerated action. So, obviously, at this point, they are not widely available. I have no doubt that they will be eventually, though. I'll leave it to David to discuss pricing on an individual basis. You can contact him through the Stanwood website.

Marty said:


Hi Marty,
My take home message from your comments is that a good idea, poorly executed, is a disaster. However, when properly executed and done right, can really advance a product to a higher level of function. I can tell you from personal experience that this is a great idea executed beautifully. Besides being highly desirable on any instrument being played by multiple pianists, it can benefit the individual owner by allowing him/her to accommodate to any touchweight without having to find other pianos to practice on. This will make for better adaptability when playing on other instruments. It can also give a more pleasurable experience, since a single instrument can be made to feel different, and "new" at any time. I am enjoying it immensely at home, and look forward to having other pianists enjoy it when they come by to play.

Sounds great Dan. I wish I could have been there to see how this was done. I had a chance to see the piano that David had at Grand Rapids, and it was quite interesting. He said that you were going to be going up to his shop to convert your Steinway. I was wondering how that went. It sounds like a success, and I'm glad you are happy with it.

Did you balance the action, like a regular PTD, and then add this? Or did you just let the weights stay how they were, and add the adjustable leverage device? It seems like you could do it either way, but it would be better to start with a well balanced action.

One of the comments I heard at the convention regarding the Adjustable Leverage Action was that it changed tone on the M&H A. People expected it to change the touch, but were surprised how much the sound also changed. The difference would be that when the action is set at a higher leverage, the speed of the hammer is increased. Do you notice a tonal difference on your piano when you change the ratio?

Hi Roy,
As usual, it's great to hear from you. Yes, the five days I spent with David were really interesting and challenged our creativity quite a bit. This being a prototype, and only the second one ever installed, many things had to be solved or invented on the fly. As I said earlier, that's where David really shines. Regarding the balancing of the action, we started on Friday morning with a complete Precision Touch Design assessment to determine if the piano was even a candidate for the device. Front weights, hammer weights, friction and leverage measurements were taken and run through David's program. The ratio came back at 5.8 and the piano fell into his "medium" range, which made it ideal for this device, without having to necessarily "Stanwoodize" the action first. He will not put it into a piano whose action is too far skewed from a medium touch level. That would have to be corrected for first. I had worked with my friend Tom Malenich, from the Stony Brook University Music Department to adjust frontweights, hammer weights and friction before bringing the action up to Martha's Vineyard. We were able to get it pretty close, but David did find that there was still too much friction in the key bushings, so I had to ease them again once up there. Of course, the ideal situation would be to do a PTD first, then add the Adjustable Leverage Device. Regarding the tonal changes, I was reluctant to bring that up here for fear it would spur a controversy that would cloud the true value of the device. Truth is, there is DEFINITELY a tonal change, that can be noticed when one plays at the different touchweight levels. Your explanation might be the reason, I'm not quite sure. Bottom line is, the perception of playing a different instrument is enhanced by this tonal change as well as the change in touch. It's really pretty neat. By the way, i just posted on the Tech''s forum for some key height specs. I'd be much obliged if you happened to have the ones I need. Thanks Roy. Hope all is well.
Dan

Gary, the I don't believe that the MBA action changes the leverage of the action, as stated. This is what is new about Stanwood's Variable Leverage Action. Other adjustable touchweight devices have changed force, not leverage. The MBA changes the touchweight by varying the strength of the magnets. The magnet force is changed by adjusting the gap between magnets mounted in the key with those mounted in the rail below. The MBA has both individual adjustments on each key, as well as a mechanism to adjust groups of keys. If I am wrong about this, please correct me, but that is how I read the MBA website.

Stanwood's version of the MBA action is quite different from the Velo version. For one, there is no mechanism to adjust sections of keys. And I would describe it more as Magnetically Assisted, not Magnetically Balanced. The magnets account for about the same amount of touchweight as what wippen assist springs might. So, the magnets aren't expected to do too much. Stanwood starts out with a PDT balancing job. So all of the strikeweights, and frontweights are set as per normal Stanwood protocols, but at a higher balance weight. So, the action is evenly balanced without the magnets, just heavier. Some keyleads are still used, just not as many. Then adjustable opposing magnets are mounted in the keys and on a rail beneath the keys. The MBA, as I understand it, doesn't smooth the hammer weights first, and relies on the magnets to do most of the action balancing. So, Stanwood's version is really quite different, although it does utilize magnets.

Marty, I wouldn't expect a customer to be able to adjust the magnets on their own. It would take a tech perhaps an hour or so to adjust the magnets. It's not meant to be an "on the fly" type of adjustment. It does work well. I did the an magnet installation on my own Steinway O action, and have done several others. It's a nice setup, and customers have been happy with the results.

As far as cost goes, I don't charge anything close to $10k....maybe half of that for a full PTD installation with magnets. But, it does vary by technician. Stanwood doesn't tell us what to charge. We have a half dozen Stanwood techs in Cincinnati, so maybe it's a little more competitive here on pricing.

Roy, Thanks for this very good explaination. This is much better than anything I have seen in the past. Stainwood's methods are complex and he has several different methods to improve an action. So it is hard for a non tech like myself to understand. Now I have a much better understanding.

My wife is very pleased with the improvement on her grand piano which the basic methods of David Stanwood brought. David suggested that his advanced methods would improve it even more, but my wife is not a pianist of the professional level which could use that added improvement for speed of playing.

With his basic methods our tech, Dale Probst, removed 3 lbs. of lead from her Bosendorfer 225 piano's keys and also lightened the touch, reduced the mass, increasing the ease of playing, and improved the precision of the touch. I can now see that by using springs or maginets, they could have removed even more lead.
Perhaps I should add that the $10,000 price was much more than what our Tech charged. Stanwood quoted $10,000 as the cost for him to fly down and do the work with our tech while training him to do the advanced methods such as magnets. It sounds to me that you and Dale charge about the same price.

When I saw all that Dale did for our piano, the time and training involved, and the improvement, I did not fault him for the price at all.

I have the Stanwood adjustable magnet system and the descriptions here sound correct, with one small modification. Both the front magnet and the back magnet per key can be adjusted, and the screws turn in different directions on each key to lighten the action on the front vs. the back. So you have four choices on each key: lighten or tighten the action at the back of the key, plus do the same at the front of the key. You can therefore approach the touchweight and rapidity of response of each key with some subtlety.

You must pull the entire action out to do this work, and like voicing, you have to constantly reinsert in order to see if you are happy with each adjustment. As the piano owner, I might do this occasionally if a group of keys has shifted over time from their ideal position. But so many other things are affecting the action, especially as the seasons change, that it is often better to wait for your tech to tune and regulate first before doing any adjustment on the magnets. My tech will occasionally adjust some of the magnets during regulation, which tells me he sees the bigger picture relationship between the magnet system and the rest of the action far better than I do.

The end result is a great improvement compared to typical actions on high end pianos, and the quality that comes through most of all is the ability to control the keyboard in order to achieve many exquisite different affects with considerable ease in the most demanding music. I've noticed that to achieve these affects my style of playing in the past few years has changed. It is much more effective to float your hand on to the keyboard and stroke the keys rather than pound them percussively. Because the action is now so sensitive, you can get better effects by dropping your finger weight on to the key, and you can also use this technique to emphasize one or two fingers over the others. This allows you to easily shape the tonal balance in a chord, bring out melodies in any finger, and make delicate gradations in tone in past passagework like ornamentation or cadenzas. For an amateur, the results are truly astounding. I can now perform pieces with the same polish, delicacy, sensitivity, or bravura as professional pianists I have admired in concerts or on records.

I do not have a full technical understanding of the new modification to the fulcrum or balance point of the action. If this modification changes the tone as well as the action response, it seems as if something must be happening to the relationship between the hammers and the strings. Perhaps the strike point is shifting slightly backwards or forwards, allowing the hammer to strike the string at a softer point.

Numerian said:


Numerian,
The strike point is not moved or affected in any way. Nothing in the action is being moved. What moves is a separate mechanism that slides the "gadgets", which contain the key's fulcrum point in the form of tiny cubes of felt, back and forth a very short distance fore and aft of the balance pin. This short distance translates into a 0.6 change in the action ratio in either direction. What effectively is happening is that the length of the front of the key is either shortening or lengthening relative to the back half of the key, thereby giving either a mechanical advantage, or disadvantage, to the player. Regarding what is causing the tonal changes, David and I spoke about this at length, and neither one of us could come up with a satisfactory explanation. One theory is that the player alters their technique to the change in the mechanism. Pure speculation, of course.

Thanks CC2. Since it is not the force with which the hammer hits the strings, nor the part of the hammer hitting the strings that is affected, nor the distance between the hammer and the strings, I guess that rules out any affect on the one part of the piano that would obviously change the tone. Nothing you are doing would seem to affect the sound board either.

If this change in tone is very noticeable it is a key component of the invention, and it seems David would need to figure this out in order to make it into a selling point rather than a curiosity or detriment.

Hi again Numerian,
David has never promoted the concept of tonal improvement attributable to the Adjustable Leverage Action. Curiously enough, those who play it are the ones that invariably comment on this aspect of it. His claim is that it allows the player to instantly adjust the TOUCHWEIGHT of the piano to his/her preference, which, in and of itself, is a tremendous stride forward in piano technology. Since he is not making any other claims for the device, I don't think he feels it is incumbent on him to explain any other effects people may perceive.

[quote=CC2 and Chopin lover][quote]His claim is that it allows the player to instantly adjust the [b]TOUCHWEIGHT of the piano to his/her preference, which, in and of itself, is a tremendous stride forward in piano technology. /quote]

...just a quick historical note. Clarence Hickman invented an action with adjustable touch weight back in the 1930s. I played on old M&H A that had this feature. There was a lever at the left cheek block that allowed continuous touch-weight adjustment over a large range. Even though the action was old, and as far as I could tell, original, it was a delight to play.

Ironically, the first piano David ever installed his Adjustable Leverage Action in was his own M&H A, and, it too, is a delight to play!!!!!!!!!

OK. Maybe I shouldn't have brought up the tone issue, because it is somewhat of a side issue.

As I see it, tonally there is always a trade-off between strike weight (hammer radius weight) and action ratio, for a given front weight (or radius weight of the key at the front). What the Adjustable Leverage Action does is to give us a lesson on the affect of action ratio on tone for a given strike weight and front weight. I doubt that it improves tone over what an optimized action would produce. It isolates one of the variables.

I can see how the ALA would be very enjoyable to a piano owner. I expect that he will sell quite a few. I don't see it as an improvement in performance. If I were trying to get the most out of an action, I would stick with the Stanwood PTD setup w/magnets. The magnets allow us to "cheat" a little bit by adding to either the strike-weights or the action-ratio without adding to the front weights, and so not to add inertia. Or,you can just lower inertia by taking lead out. It's just a matter of what your goals are.

CC2, you have the best of both worlds, don't you? Your CC2 concert grand which has the PTD w/magnets, and a Steinway M with the ALA. Not bad!

I certainly would enjoy that type of action manipulation.. I would love to play sometimes on a soft a silk, light as air action rather than my dependable and fine Renner.