Whacking

[Farrell]

It's always something to be aware of, absolutely.

Terry Farrell
Piano Tuning & Service
Tampa, Florida
mfarrel2@tampabay.rr.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Ilvedson" <ilvey@jps.net>
To: "pianotech" <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2001 1:11 AM
Subject: Re: Whacking


> I was referring to no one in particular and I don't keep up with who
started threads, but I have read posts about pounding while tuning and I
might ad if you need a whacker to tune you might? be pounding harder than
necessary...
>
> David Ilvedson, RPT
>
>
> *********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********
>
> On 2/11/01 at 10:42 PM Farrell wrote:
>
> >"Hitting the keys as hard as you can until the note won't drift means a
> >total lack of hammer technique."
> >
> >You should go into politics. This is fiction. I have read all these
posts,
> >as I am the one who started it. Not one has described anything like the
> >above.
> >
> >Terry Farrell
> >Piano Tuning & Service
> >Tampa, Florida
> >mfarrel2@tampabay.rr.com
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "David Ilvedson" <ilvey@jps.net>
> >To: "pianotech" <pianotech@ptg.org>
> >Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2001 9:17 PM
> >Subject: Re: Whacking
> >
> >
> >> The PTG Tuning test has a technique to test the stability of the unison
> >portion of the test.  Maybe someone can post that exact info.  It is not
> >whacking in any way...Tuning stability is a combination of good hammer
> >technique and an adequate force to insure that a portion of the string
> >segments isn't excessively different than other segments.  Equalizing of
> >the
> >segments is apparently not possible...Hitting the keys as hard as you can
> >until the note won't drift means a total lack of hammer technique.  I do
> >not
> >whack anymore and my tunings stand up to concertos...The archives have
lots
> >of stuff on this subject.
> >>
> >> David I.
> >>
> >> *********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********
> >>
> >> On 2/11/01 at 8:18 PM Yardarm103669107@AOL.COM wrote:
> >>
> >> >Bill:
> >> >While the pin might be very stable, the segments of string from the
> >tuning
> >> >pin on out to the waste length are under less and less tension if the
> >> >pitch
> >> >is being changed upward; the reverse is true in pitch lowering. The
> >string
> >> >system is unstable until an equalizing force is used to attempt to
> >> >overcome
> >> >friction at terminations and get the tension to equalize. I personally
> >> >doubt
> >> >that a string system left unaltered is stable enough to leave for very
> >> >long.
> >> >On the other hand, a stiff blow which is allowed to linger rather than
> >> >stacato damped will go a long distance in stabilizing the string
system.
> >> >Overhard blows can indeed destabilize the system in the reverse
> >direction.
> >> >
> >> >A good test of this phenomenon is to try this. The next time you have
to
> >> >raise the pitch on a piano more than 20 cents, pick a string in the
> >middle
> >> >register and after pulling it up to where you want, take a brass punch
> >and
> >> >give the waste length of string on the other side of the bridge a tap
in
> >> >the
> >> >opposite direction of the bridge pin, i.e. as if you were unseating
the
> >> >string; you will immediately notice a drop in pitch in the singing
> >length
> >> >as
> >> >tension is released around the bridge. If you did not give the string
a
> >> >stiff
> >> >blow to equalize out tension, then that residual unequal tension would
> >> >gradually detune the piano. More thoughts? Is this clear? Again, I'm
not
> >> >advocating damaging blows (either to the piano or to self).
> >> >PR-J
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
>
>