Ed, At 02:18 PM 10/10/2003 -0400, you wrote: >Horace- > >Here's a question for you (and anybody else): How would you imagine >mechanically, >a "blow"....or should we say "touch"? that is a mechanical imitation of >the way(s) >a fine performer might move the key? It's easy enough to drop a half >pound weight >4", but that seems a very crude approximation of a way of striking a key >that is >seldom used in performance. > >My point is subtle (and some would say -too-subtle), that we should begin >with a >model of what sensitive performers do, then try to make a contraption that >works >similarly. I fully agree as to importance, but respectfully demur as to order of execution. Your point re: sensitive performers is very well taken and absolutely crucial. However, the opening of the thread had to do with a series of assumptions about how, if indeed at all, pinning effects tone. So, the first set of testing should be to establish that point. This is something which seems to need to be revisited every so often. As to how performers effect tone, and how we can duplicate that process... I am not sure that we are not chasing nirvana. Performers can and do effect tone. How they do it has had engineers and technicians losing hair and raising blood pressure since the days when real Pleyels and Chickerings had two legs. The problem (and, the bet that most manufacturers make and pretty consistently win) is that even the average piano action is capable of much more nuance and variation than the vast majority of pianists have any hope of achieving. The folks we are discussing in this thread represent the extreme minority of musical and technical artistry and competence. There have, as a percentage of folks who play at the piano, never been very many of them. Otto's story about Pressler is an excellent case in point. Another would be the S&S celebration which took place at Carnegie Hall a few years back. Roughly 20 "world-class" pianists, all performing on one of two (mostly only on one) instrument. To paraphrase one of them: 20 different pianists, 20 different sounds. Sadly, the recording made of this evening was done using Crown/Cerwin Vega crystal plate microphones and was badly engineered - the piano on the CD sounds nothing like what we heard in Carnegie Hall. In fairness, most manufacturers simply cannot consistently produce instruments at the level assumed by the highest level of performers and remain solvent. Yes, there are a very few exceptions; but, even there, the instruments themselves require exceptionally careful maintenance in order to remain at their original levels. So, as it has for a hundred-fifty years or so, it falls to technicians in the field to do the extreme upper-end stuff...and, there is precious little support for the work. More later. Horace >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Horace Greeley" <hgreeley@stanford.edu> >To: "College and University Technicians" <caut@ptg.org> >Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 12:51 PM >Subject: RE: Steinway "pinning" dilemma > > > > > > Jim, > > > > At 08:51 AM 10/10/2003 -0600, you wrote: > > >List, > > > > > >Last week we were given a Realtime Spectrum Analyzer. We didn't know > > >exactly what to do with it. Hmmm... Anyone want to suggest some tests to > > >run? > > > > If Tim remembers Chris' mechanism more clearly than I do, maybe he can give > > you some details. The thing that made that series of demonstrations so > > phenomenal was the ability to so precisely control the blow. If memory > > serves, there is a pretty good engineering school at BYU - maybe some > > enterprising students could come up with something in their (copious) free > > time. > > > > I don't think that Chris would present his work as being the end of the > > experiments - rather, as places from which to begin. > > > > Pinning makes a difference. Now you have precisely the toy, errrr, tool, > > to demonstrate that fact. > > > > I wonder, given the changes/advancements in computer technology since Chris > > did most of his work...perhaps there is a way to more graphically represent > > things, real time, as well as getting the numbers out. The analyzer Chris > > used was a B&K, with numbered lights for a read out...very useful; but a > > little more difficult to immediately apprehend. > > > > Horace > > > > > > > > > > >Jim Busby BYU > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > >From: caut-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces@ptg.org] On Behalf Of > > >Tim Coates > > >Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 7:05 AM > > >To: College and University Technicians > > >Subject: Re: Steinway "pinning" dilemma > > > > > >Does anyone remember the classes Chris Robinson did using a Realtime > > >Spectrum Analyzer (borrowed from Kurztweil Company)? I know it was in > > >Philadelphia about 12 years ago. Using a mechanism to create an even > > >blow and recorded with the analyzer he showed how repinning to proper > > >specs (at that time 6 grams) changed dramatically the tone of a > > >particular note. > > > > > >Pretty eye opening. Previously people speculated about the tonal > > >affects of proper flange friction. He showed it scientifically to be > > >true. > > > > > >Tim Coates > > >University of South Dakota > > >University of Sioux Falls > > > > > >Fred Sturm wrote: > > > > > > >> --On Wednesday, October 8, 2003 7:55 PM -0600 Roger Jolly > > > >> <roger.j@sasktel.net> wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> > > > >>>> Hi Fred, > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> 4gms of friction seems to be the optimum for tone > > > >>> production, _as it keeps the knuckle firmly in contact with the > > > >> > > > > balancier_. > > > > snip > > > > > > > >>> Regards Roger. > > > >> > > > > > > > > Roger, > > > > Looking at this more carefully, I have to disagree with you as to > > > > the mechanism for the tonal effect of firm pinning. From the point of > > > > view of the hammer being thrown to the string, I think mass, inertia, > > > > and leverage are plenty to maintain firm contact between knuckle and > > > > jack. Where lack of firmness has its effect is in the wobble that is > > > > introduced during the throw of the hammer, and even more so the wobble > > > > > > > upon impact with the string (ie, what the hammer does during the time > > > > it remains in contact). So from a purely tonal point of view, I don't > > > > think friction per se plays a role. > > > > Where it does have an effect is in the neuro-muscular response of > > > > the pianist. I am convinced that a fine pianist can feel the > > > > difference between 2 and 4 grams friction in a hammershank center, in > > > > terms of what needs to be done to create the final velocity of the > > > > hammer, and that 4 grams will be found preferable in allowing more > > > > nuanced control. But even more important is evenness from note to > > > > note. Better all 2 gram than higglety pigglety with an average of 4 > > >grams. > > > > All of this is more in the realm of mental picturing than > > > > measurable physics, because it is next to impossible to separate one > > > > factor from the others with any reliability. You have to assume > > > > travel, square hanging of hammers, evenness of felt density and > > > > elasticity, evenness of shank firmness/sponginess, etc., etc. But when > > > > > > > all you do to a fly away action is repin it, the result is usually > > > > quite dramatic, at least in my experience. > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Fred Sturm > > > > University of New Mexico > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > caut list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >caut list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives > > >_______________________________________________ > > >caut list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > caut list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives > > > >_______________________________________________ >caut list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC