Anybody ever get plans from this guy 
http://www.blackboardcreations.com/hurdygurdy.htm

Seth Hamon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:  Thanks , I'll do some more fooling 
around and put on my thinking cap.... Seth

Roy Trotter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:   > The book also says the distance 
between the wheel and the tuning
> box is 343mm,,, Shouldn't that be the distance between the main
> bridge and the two smaller bridges at the end of the key box.... 

343 is to the bridge, not the wheel. That's another thing, like pegwall
height that needs to be worked around. I know that wheel placement is
critical, but I don't have the figures (anywhere). One of those brainy
guys (Simon?, Arle?, Graham?) reported on some experiments on wheel
placement, you could probably dig it out of the archives. But that's
just wrong in the Dewitt book. We were hoping for translator errors,
but that doesn't appear to be wrong there.
Since I can't find the calculator on this PC at work, and didn't bring
my work book. Divide 343 ( 17.15, I think.) then you can measure from
the Octave with impunity.
I also make pencil marks on the nut end to give an idea of generally
where the nut should start out. I always have to move it forward
(toward the bridge).

--- Seth Hamon wrote:

> I've come to the conclusion by reading the book and looking a Aldens
> supp. plans that the vibrating length is 343mm between bridges no the
> wheel... The plans say the vibrating length is determined by the
> wheel which I know is wrong thanks to the supp. plans... With that
> said..." Where does the wheel go?" In relationship to the front of
> the key/tangent box and the main bridge, I cannot find a dimention in
> the book for this spot.. I think it may have been left out since the
> author listed the wheel as the vibrating length at 343mm...
> 
> The book also says the distance between the wheel and the tuning
> box is 343mm,,, Shouldn't that be the distance between the main
> bridge and the two smaller bridges at the end of the key box....

> This is confusing... Seth

Yep.

Later, Roy
> 



Reply via email to