This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment Roy Peters forwarded some of the discussion about Wapin to me. Thanks = Roy. I have subscribed just long enough to participate in a technical = part of the discussion. Ron N... You have it backwards. Wapin, we believe, reflects the initial struck = displacement of the string into a plane that is 90 degrees to that = struck direction. If the piano is a grand piano, then Wapin, pushes = most of that vertical displacement to a horizontal displacement. The = string does take on an elliptical motion in both Wapin and nonWapin = pianos. The difference with Wapin is that the major semi-axis of this = elliptical motion is in a direction that is 90 degrees different from = the struck direction. =20 The Weinreich model described is the accepted paradigm. It is a = theoretical model which can only be derived by inference. In reality the = real model is much more complex. Wouldn't Wapin mean that the increased sustain robs the power? Not, necessarily. We believe that Wapin captures the energy of a = displaced string and prevents it from being leaked off to the soundboard = before it has a chance to setup a standing wave. The means there is = more reserve energy in the string that can gradually be given off to the = board over time, after the standing waves have setup. In short, the = energy is given over to the board in a harmonic form rather than a = nonharmonic form. This could explain the fact that there is no = percieved loss of power and a greater clarity. =20 This is what we believe. However, the science is extremely complicated. = It is very time consumming and difficult. Last fall at the Ohio State = Seminar we did an installation on a Mason & Hamlin. The installation = was the new method that can be accomplished without restringing. We did = some before and after tests. Jim Coleman's brother, Bob Coleman, is a = retired scientist from NASA. He hastily agreeded to do the tests. His = background in in Finite Modal Analysis. He helped developed this method = for finding changes that would occur in the the Space Shuttle after it = returned from orbit. His technique is still in use at NASA.=20 The Mason and Hamlin showed mixed and inconclusive results that were = most likely due to sampling anomolities and hastily made testing = procedures. Bob Coleman was not as discouraged as I was. He hears the = difference. He is an accomplished pianist in his own right. He has = eagerly volunteered his professionalism and expertise to do more with = Wapin. This spring I will redo the action in his home piano. I will = voice and tune and make it the best I can. He will then make all his = measurements. In the summer I will return to install Wapin without = restringing. He will then make new measurements. I was discouraged about our first results last fall but his take on the = thing is that he hears the difference and that some of the best science = occurs when you are not quite sure what it is you are looking for. We = shall see. On another note... Jon Ralinovsky, technician at Miami University in Oxford Ohio will be = hosting the Cincinnat Chapter meeting, February, 26. Miami bought two = new Baldwin Rs recently. He took the bold step of adding Wapin to one = of these Badlwin Rs. For the meeting he will move the two Baldwin Rs = into one room so that we can compare these two very similar pianos in an = attempt to acoustically verify a Wapin difference. I have no idea = whether or not we will hear a difference. Kudos to Jon for trying this = experiment. Michael Wathen, Wapin. LLP ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/d2/0c/cd/0c/attachment.htm ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC