As I mentioned in another post the terms weren't mine. I do understand the mechanics of what is taking place, it's the precise description that was at issue and the conflicted logic that certain certain terms created, or uh, converted, or maybe transduced and for all practical purposes amplified in my brain. Thank you though. David Love www.davidlovepianos.com -----Original Message----- From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Ed Sutton Sent: Sunday, May 10, 2009 1:44 PM To: caut at ptg.org Subject: Re: [CAUT] Accujust and grunting fish bait David- There's no reason to use the terms "new" or "create" in the statement. Does the engine of your car "create new motion?" The mass of the moving hammer displaces the string. The displacement moves along the string and is reflected at the ends of the string. It moves back and forth along the string, becoming (somewhat) periodic. The bridge and soundboard, connected to one end of the string, are not absolutely rigid. Although they are rigid enough to reflect much of the string's displacement, they are flexible enough to be moved somewhat every time the periodic displacement arrives at the bridge pin. The soundboard is a broad membrane-like surface. The movements of the soundboard displace air molecules, creating periodic increases and decreases in the air pressure, which move through the air When these air pressure changes reach and move a living creatures eardrum, the ear and brain of the creature perceive the air movements as "sound." Although we speak of these various "parts" as if they are separate from each other, they are all interconnected. The string, and its movements are not separate from the soundboard and its movements, or from the air and its movements. They always move together in complex interconnectedness. For example, lift the dampers and play a trombone near the piano. The air movements caused by the trombone are partially transduced through the soundboard to the strings, and back out again. Since we tend to play more than one note at a time on the piano, the interactions of the various strings may be very complex. Finger energy is converted into air movement, which we hear as sound. The only thing "created" is (hopefully) music and some new, good feelings in the performer and listeners. Ed S. (I welcome criticism and editing of this statement, in hopes of having as clear and un-mystical a basic description of how a piano makes a sound as we can reach, given current knowledge. I realize I have left out many details, trying to keep it basic and straightforward.) ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Love" <davidlovepianos at comcast.net> To: <caut at ptg.org> Sent: Sunday, May 10, 2009 4:04 PM Subject: Re: [CAUT] Accujust and grunting fish bait >I agree with that. But then the notion of having created new sound creates > a conceptual problem for me. > > David Love > www.davidlovepianos.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Ron > Nossaman > Sent: Sunday, May 10, 2009 11:15 AM > To: caut at ptg.org > Subject: Re: [CAUT] Accujust and grunting fish bait > > David Love wrote: > >> If we agree that no new energy is created, but that the energy from the >> string through transduction creates new sound via the soundboard, and if >> sound is energy, haven't we created new energy? >> >> David Love > > No. Energy has merely passed from the motion of the finger of > the player, into our ear as sound, via a number of conversions > and considerable disbursal and absorption through the action, > strings, soundboard, air, etc. We can't in any way create > either matter, or energy. We can only modify one through the > use of the other - and vise versa. > > Ron N > >
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC