---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment At 01:14 PM 4/8/2004 -0500, Ron wrote: (Italicized portion reinserted by ds) >>>My experience with our D was a definite perceptible improvement in >>>sustain, power, and clarity to some notes from taping once >>>judiciously/gently down on every bridge pin in the killer octave. On >>>some strings, the tuning pitch dropped three or more BPS, on others it >>>had no affect. >>> >>>-Mike Jorgensen >> >>By tapping the pins, you effectively seated the strings with the rough >>equivalent of a 20 pound weight courtesy of the friction from the offset >>angle. Yes, I expect it did sound cleaner. >> >>Ron N DS >>So we know it can work sometimes. Maybe the pin moved down, dragging the >>string along. Maybe the shock of the tap overcame friction of the >>abraded and notched pin, to allow the string to return to its more >>neutral position. We don't know which of the numerous scenarios we have >>recently discussed is active in this piano. >RN >No, we don't know EXACTLY and COMPLETELY what is happening in any >situation - ever. Why get existentialist on me? I continue to ask that, in the absence of some sort of proof, theories be acknowledged as such. What I meant by "numerous scenarios" was the circumstances of the piano...bearing, notched pins, etc. I just wanted to allow that some other effect than dragging the strings down to the bridge surface could be taking place. >>Ron has, at various times, seemed to accept tapping as a solution, and at >>other times, not. > >No, I haven't, regardless of what you appear to feel I seem to have >implied that I might have meant. Tapping is not a solution, and I have >never said it was. I have also never said that it wasn't a possible short >term improvement of a tonal problem. What I have repeatedly said is that >it doesn't fix the problem. It just masks the symptoms. What I have been >apparently miserably unsuccessful in attempting to describe is what I >think is really happening, based on my understanding of physics, >observable evidence, and logic. I have tried to present it in as >straightforward and unambiguous a manner as I can, in as much detail as I >have worked out to my satisfaction, and in connection with as many other >surrounding and extenuating factors as I can connect. That's the best I can do. My apologies in reverting to my imprecise usage. I didn't mean "solution", rather, a temporary abatement of the offending symptoms. For clarity (of others) I'll requote (again) from a previous post: >You choose to ridicule me here. You left out the quotes I felt were >inconsistent. I'll repeat them: > >>In response to me you wrote: >> >>>I do care about the string contact with the front of the bridge, but I >>>do not agree that tapping the pin will achieve that end. That's the >>>whole point of all this. If the string isn't contacting the notch edge, >>>it's for a reason that tapping neither string, nor pin will cure. >> >>In response to Wim, you said: >> >>>Wimblees: >>>>There has been a lot of discussion about tapping the pin to create >>>>better tone, less distortion, etc. But what are we doing? Is the better >>>>termination caused because by tapping we are driving the pin deeper >>>>into the wood at the bottom of the hole, thus creating a more stable pin, >>>Ron N: >>>Partly, but I think mostly dragging the string down with the pin to the >>>notch edge. >> >>and >>>WimB >>>>So what is the real reason for tapping? More wood, or less pin? >>>RonN >>>Or seating the string by proxy? > >You are telling me that you do not believe that tapping either the pin or >the string will cure the lack of notch edge contact, but, in response to >Wim, you at least imply that that is exactly what is being done. You may >not be able to explain it, but you shouldn't place the responsibility for >the confusion on me. I should not have used "solution: or "cure". >>My continued discomfort with these kinds of questions (or observations) >>and answers (or explanations) is that both are too general to allow the >>relevant subtleties to be appreciated, or retained. >> >>David Skolnik > >Then you're just going to have to find yourself an expert that can answer >your questions. I've given you what I have. Mike's observations were perfectly relevant. They just lacked enough detail to add much insight. I didn't intend to be demeaning. I would express my appreciation for what you've given much more often, except when I did, you told me you didn't want to be stroked. So, maybe once every two weeks I'll just mildly hint at it. David Skolnik ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/caut.php/attachments/1b/0f/68/0a/attachment.htm ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC