On Nov 29, 2010, at 3:45 PM, David Love wrote: >It's interesting to note the new trend on S/F resistance to very >low levels in the neighborhood of 0-1 grams. This trend seems to >have latched onto the Stanwood protocols in order to make the action >feel even more facile. Personally, I think it's a mistake and while >it does give a first impression of a very friendly and resistance >free action the down side (for many, though not all) is an accompanying >lack of control of both tone and touch. Hi David L, Not sure what you mean by latching onto a protocol. I can say that we've observed a move over the last three decades towards the heaviest hammers in history which, when properly made and voiced, can pull tone and volume out of a soundboard that a lighter hammer just can't physically do. I think the trend towards low friction is in part to make it easier to simply play high hammer weight actions without tiring the pianist. The danger is that low friction exposes unevenness of weight and leverage. So with low friction actions it becomes more important to even out weight elements within the action, most importantly hammer weight. Perhaps this is what you mean by latching on the Stanwood protocols. Skates on ice might by an analogy. If the ice is really smooth then the surface doesn't interfere with the skating and low friction isn't a problem. But a skater certainly feels every little bump in the ice. So in this modern world of low friction it's much more important to pay attention to reducing weight inconsistencies as much as is possible and practical. The first experimental action I made in 1988 had an older style of action set up that we don't see much these days. Very light cold pressed hammers hammer flanges with the rotational friction set to 5 grams. Rudolf Serkin tested this action and commented: "The action is perfect. It's evenŠ the whole thing." "It feels connected somehow. I couldn't believe it at first." "It's amazing. The feeling is so immediate." This was an action that featured no precision weighting yet the effect was similar. I think that Serkin was feeling the ameliorating effect of friction which creates a certain viscosity smooths over weight inconsistencies and gives a sureness to the stroke, especially in the pianissimo ranges. Another pianist described the difference as spending your life in fresh water and then swimming in salt water and feeling the added buoyancy. The light hammers didn't put out the concert hall power that we need but this piano certainly did have a beautiful and subtle quality to it. My personal preference is to set the action with a precision balanced hammer weight/leverage combo that is dynamically light enough to allow for 5 gram Hammer flange friction. It really expands the pianissimo ranges which is the most interesting and challenging part of piano tone. Getting back Alan McCoy's comment about the starting friction of teflon being higher than wool. It certainly is difficult to observe a classic motion of the hammer when measuring up/down weight with a teflon action. Maybe the unique quality of teflon has something to do with it. I recently balanced an action and left the teflon parts in. The owner who is a very fine pianist is delighted with the result. I don't like teflon for high use zones in Universities.. they just don't hold up. Where would we be without sheep!? David Stanwood I personally find the pianissimo that the real challenge is creating a high degree of control for the pianist in the pianissimo ranges.
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC