---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment Dear Bill- Thank you for a very interesting post. Strike point is a good place to start comunication with the player. Moving the action and sharing responses about the tone helps us develop a shared vocabulary and experience some moments of agreement. It is easy to make repeat comparisons. Often you can feel the tension ease up after a few agreements about whether the sound is better or worse as the action is moved. Ed Sutton RPT ----- Original Message ----- From: William Schneider To: College and University Technicians Sent: 10/5/2004 2:26:16 PM Subject: Re: [CAUT] voicing a D Hello Wim I am always surprised that piano technicians haven't developed a very precise language for describing tonal, or voicing problems. In fact usually the most basic observations don't seem to have been made, or at least are not mentioned. This is not a criticism of you in particular, but I do see lots of room for improvement in the profession. I also see it as our responsibility to help pianists describe what they're hearing, which means teaching them how to listen objectively. It is perhaps the notion that timbre is subjective that has prevented us from examining the many tonal attributes can be objectively observed. There will still be plenty of room for individual preferences when that has been done. Looking at individual notes in the various ranges of the piano (when in tune) one would do something like the following: Check Hammer spacing, string level (phase problems), then Check the strike point (ie. seeing that the hammer strikes the string at the correct antinode). This is best done right after the hammers are shaped. This is done by sliding the action in and out a fraction of an inch while repeating a loud blow. The right spot emphasizes the fundamental lower consonant partials, so you have to listen "low' in the sound. When you get some skill doing this, you'll hear tonal changes in the bass with movement of as little as 1/64th inch. The factory strike point isn't always right. No amount of needling or lacquer will get rid of dissonant partials or loss of power due to incorrect strike point. Check the tone at ppp, and sugarcoat untill it's clean and even. Next, compare power curve to color curve. Does the tone get brighter the louder you play. (One of the areas for individual preference is here; how much brighter do you want it?) If the color curve ever reverses direction as you crescendo, you'll have two problems. First a lack of sustain at that power and above, second the tone will appear dull and sometimes coarse. What you are hearing is that the hammer is softer underneath than above, which suggests the solution. The coarseness can be caused by either of two things, sometimes both: 1. a hard spot high in the hammer, which can be fixed either by hardening below, if you want a brighter piano, or softening the hard spot and doing nothing below, or both. The choice you make will give you a different piano from the others, but still a musical one. 2. The coarsness could also be the result of a new phase problem. Even though the hammer is level with the strings, the boundaries between the softer and harder parts of the hammer underneath may not be level with the strings. When you play at the relevant power level, this sounds just exactly like the hammers and strings were never mated to each other. Play at that power and check the tone of the left string only against that of the right string only, then needle at the appropriate depth on the brigter side, until both sides sound the same. This softening will gain you power because the strings will sound in phase. In general, it's a correct relationship of hardness between the upper part of the hammer and the lower that's the issue, not the absolute hardness levels. The hammer should get harder as you go deeper into it; that's what makes the power and color curves move in the same direction. If you want a piano with a lot of punch, the levels will be harder overall. If you want a lush piano, make them softer. You can be very creative in deciding how lush at ppp and how snorty at fff. It sounds from your description like you may have a color curve reversal going on. A reasonable person could call the resulting sound unfocused. Good luck. Bill At 07:29 AM 10/1/2004, you wrote: I need some help from some of you who have lots of voicing experience. The D in our concert hall has a problem, at least as perceived by one of our piano faculty and a musicologist. They differ on where they hear the problem, but it seems to be the same sound they hear. They describe it as a wave length that is very wide, as opposed to a more focused wave. It is not so much a twangy sound and it lack a certain amount of depth. They are even leaning towards a soundboard problem. The piano is only 2 years old. I have lacquered and voiced the hammers last year, and this summer spent quite a bit of time leveling strings, making the sure the hammer strike point is level, etc. All the usual fine point. But I want to see what I can do to get more "focus" out of the hammer. Thanks Wim ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/caut.php/attachments/2d/bc/4d/3f/attachment.htm ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC