Sound waves(The behavior of soundboards)

[Phillip L Ford]

On Fri, 11 Jan 2002 00:42:28  
 John Delacour wrote:

>PF:
>>I interpret this to mean that the bridge and top are moving in direct response
>>to the input from the string.
>
>That's a pretty ambiguous statement.  The bridge and top are 
>obviously moving because the string has caused them to move, but they 
>are _moving_ at a frequency that is not related to the frequency of 
>the sound generated by the string.  It is not this movement that is 
>responsible for the acoustic radiation that reaches our ears.  How 
>many times do I have to draw this distinction?!
>
>JD
>
I can't speak for others John, but in my case you're going to have to keep
repeating it or rephrasing it until I understand what you are trying to say,
and I can repeat back to you what I believe you said and have you say
Yes, that's what I said and what I meant.  I haven't been able to do that
so far.  What I thought you had been saying was that the bridge and soundboard
do not move as a result of applied force from the string. (Aside-If I understand
Robin correctly he says there is no applied force from the vibrating string).
The bridge and soundboard only move because some sort of input at the bridge
causes some sort of wave or pressure which then causes something else
to happen which then causes the soundboard to move.  It has nothing to do
with string movement.

Now, what I believe you are saying is that the bridge and soundboard do
move as a direct result of force applied by the string but that movement is
unrelated to the frequency of the string and has nothing to do with sound
radiation from the soundboard.  Is this what you said and meant?

Phil F