capo-hardening vs hardened capo rod

[Delwin D Fandrich]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard West" <rwest1@unl.edu>
To: <caut@ptg.org>
Sent: October 04, 2001 8:45 AM
Subject: Re: capo-hardening vs hardened capo rod


> Some things in this long thread don't seem to add up.  So I have a few
> questions:
>
> 1.  Why is harder, better?  1/2 of most pianos are strung using agraffes,
i.e.,
> brass.  Brass is not a hard metal.

This is an issue which is open to some debate. Personally, I'm not a fan of
the 'harder is better' school of thought; preferring to insure good string
termination through a combination of adequate string deflection and short
duplex length. In so doing the V-bar can be softer than the string and still
give good, clean termination without the problem (danger) of string
breakage.


>
> 2.  If capo hardening only penetrates 1mm, it seems that such a small
amount
> would be filed off when preparing a raw plate for stringing right in the
> factory.  Are we really dealing with a hardened capo even on a new piano?

In general, no. Most V-bars are shaped to some extent before the plate is
installed in the piano. Any hardening that might exist as a natural result
of the casting process is probably milled away.


>
> 3.  Why is strike point so critical/unforgiving in the octave around C6?
It
> seems that if I have "zingers" in that area it's more often a strike point
> problem than a capo bar problem, assuming that the capo has been cleaned
up.

It's not. Zingers are not really related to the strikepoint ratio. They are
related to the shape of the V-bar, the string deflection angle and the
length of the duplex string segment. See the June and August, 1995 PT
Journals.


>
> 4.  In the battle for artist approval, why have "soft" capo bar pianos
seemed
> to be the instrument of choice?

Really great marketing and a really great C&A program unmatched by any other
manufacturer.

Del