[CAUT] Semantics

[Keith Roberts]

You modify the vibration in the wire by changing the shape of the hammer and
the spring chariteristics of the hammer. This imparts a different wave and
nodal pattern which alters the volume of the partials.
Keith Roberts

On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 5:57 AM, Chris Solliday <csolliday at rcn.com> wrote:

>  Ben Sloane,
> That's Dr. Sanderson and Verituner. What's the point of being such a little
> snot on this list? Don't you have some work to do?
> Chris Solliday rpt
>
>  ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Sloane, Benjamin (sloaneba) <sloaneba at ucmail.uc.edu>
> *To:* 'caut at ptg.org'
>  *Sent:* Thursday, May 14, 2009 8:40 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [CAUT] Semantics
>
>   “This is not amplified sound; there was no original sound to be
> amplified, only the mechanical energy stored in the vibrating string.”
>
>
>
>    What I don’t understand about this excerpt is this. If what I do has
> nothing to do with sound, and everything to do with a vibrating string, then
> why are so many piano technicians deciding they need to consolidate all
> their energies to modifying sound, and leaving modifying string tension for
> correct string vibration to some guys named Sanderson, Reyburn, Dr.
> Verituner, Sir Tunelab, and their apologist, Baldassin?
>
>
>
>    Furthermore, how do we consider those who leave modifying string
> vibrations to others, assuming this is all about string vibration, and not
> sound, good piano technicians at all in light of this conviction?
>
>
>
> *From:* caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] *On Behalf Of *Delwin
> D Fandrich
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 13, 2009 2:10 PM
> *To:* caut at ptg.org
> *Subject:* Re: [CAUT] Semantics
>
>
>
>
> | To me, the transducer argument *de-couples* the strings and
> | the soundboard--(by doing this "transducing," taking one
> | thing and making it another).  That goes against everything
> | I've read about piano acoustics.
>
> This would rather depend on what you are reading.
>
> To be sure, Wm Braid White wrote eloquently, if some what confusingly,
> about the *power of resonance*, that mysterious property he found in
> certain materials—namely spruce—to *amplify* the *sonorous quality* of the
> strings. Thus he was able to state that “more resonating power is required
> for the relatively weaker treble strings than for the relatively stronger
> bass strings.” In this way he was able to explain why piano builders had
> found it necessary to make their soundboard panels thicker in the treble
> area and thinner in the bass area. In 1909 White did not yet have to contend
> with the so-called “Diaphragmatic" soundboard.
>
> But that was then and this is now. So far as I know there is no modern
> writer who speaks of the piano soundboard system as an amplifier. In the *Five
> Lectures* series, Klaus Wogram writes, “The soundboard transforms the
> mechanical vibrations into radiated sound.” Benade (*Fundamentals of
> Musical Acoustics*) discusses the soundboard as a "two-dimensional driven
> plate." This plate, by means of forced vibration (the stored mechanical
> energy of the strings) creates *sound* (acoustical energy) by means of the
> resulting physical motion. For Fletcher & Rossing (*The Physics of Musical
> Instruments*) it is described thus: “Acoustically, the soundboard is the
> main radiating member in the instrument, transforming some of the mechanical
> energy of the strings and bridges into acoustical energy.”
>
> It might be helpful to try a little experiment. Locate a thin piece of wood
> several inches wide and a few inches long. Now locate a small hammer. With
> the thin—and so far silent—wood panel in one hand tap its surface with the
> hammer. Sound (acoustical energy) is created when the hammer strikes
> (mechanical energy) the wood panel. It is an impulse sound, of course, and
> it dies out very quickly but if you could make your hammer strikes fast
> enough (vibrating mechanical energy) the resulting sound would become a tone
> (continuous acoustical energy).
>
> By striking the piece of wood with the hammer you created sound, or
> acoustical energy. It wasn’t free—you had to invest mechanical energy to get
> it—but that acoustical energy was not amplified from anything. It was
> created. Now picture the soundboard bridge being struck repeatedly and
> rapidly by a series of tiny hammer blows (the vibrating string) and picture
> the soundboard responding to those blows by slight movements. Because of its
> large size the soundboard will create sound—acoustical energy. This is not
> amplified sound; there was no original sound to be amplified, only the
> mechanical energy stored in the vibrating string. (And let’s not quibble
> over the minute amount of sound created by the vibrating string(s). This is
> completely overwhelmed by the wash of acoustical energy coming from the
> soundboard.)
>
> Semantically we could, I suppose, quibble over whether the piano soundboard
> system should be called a *transformer*—“…a thing which transforms
> something”—or a *transducer*—"a device for converting variations in one
> physical quantity, as pressure, brightness, etc., quantitatively into
> variations in another, as voltage, position, etc.” (Both from the *OED*)
> What we cannot do, at least not if we want our language to meet even minimal
> standards of technical accuracy, is call the piano soundboard system an
> amplifier. Over the past century our understanding of how the piano works
> has evolved considerably as has the language used to describe and discuss
> it.
>
> Words and their meanings in a technical community—and both CAUT and
> PianoTech are technical communities—are important. They convey certain
> defined technical meanings to the participants. These are not casual
> discussions over the Sunday barbecue with Aunt Matilda. To misuse technical
> words or to apply one's own meanings to them—even if that usage was in vogue
> a hundred years ago—can only mislead and confuse the reader or participant.
>
> ddf
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/caut.php/attachments/20090514/11fbf1cd/attachment.htm>