---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
Greetings Andre,
I have a few thoughts of why this is so.
1. In the discussion it has been assumed the hammer immediately moves=20
upwards. Not always . ppp Yes, fff No.
At about Mezzo, the inertia and mass of the hammer will cause the shank to=
=20
bend and the hammer dip downwards, before starting to travel towards the=20
string. If every thing is well regulated there is less loss of energy in=20
the loose mechanical coupling of all the respective action parts. The more=
=20
energy that is retained in the bent shank, the faster it will rebound from=
=20
the string as it releases it's energy. The tighter the let off within=20
concert reg limits, the more pronounced the effect..
Terry mentioned the base ball bat follow through. The bat bends in=20
exactly the same manner. Just at the point of release the bend energy gives=
=20
the ball a little extra 'pop'. Over simplified I know. But a reasonable=20
Hypothesis.
2. Any regulation, tuning, or voicing action, will change the personality=
=20
of the instrument, and will have a profound effect on the pianist. So the=
=20
pianist will adapt to take advantage of the effect. They will do it=20
subliminally, and will never say to you. WOW the after touch is so well=20
defined.
3. One of the reasons Werzen felt hammers work so nicely, is the elastic=20
effect of the shoulders springing the hammer from the string. Dwell time
(The amount of time the hammer stays in contact with the string) is every=20
thing, when it comes to producing good tone.
Just my thought's on the subject
Regards Roger
At 08:21 AM 4/2/2005, you wrote:
>OK you guys and gals,
>
>Let me first tell you that, from the beginning, there were techs who said=
=20
>that an improvement of tone was not possible "because the hammer hits the=
=20
>string first", and that they could not understand how it is possible that=
=20
>a firmer punching would have this result at all.
>They are right in assuming that, if the hammer hits the string first, an=20
>improvement of tone is not possible. If the hammer hits the string, an=20
>improvement of tone, caused by this punching, is not possible.
>They are however wrong, in believing that the hammer hits the string=20
>first, although it depends on how you strike that key : you can play a=20
>note without hitting the bottom, the key frame, so it depends on how you=20
>play that key.
>If you play that key in a, what we call 'normal' way, the key will hit the=
=20
>bottom first followed by the hammer hitting the string.
>
>I think that I may say here that it should be clear, after all my=20
>contributions to this list, that I am not a bs'er , a fraud, or a fake=20
>story teller.
>These front punchings make all the difference in regard to how a piano=20
>feels and sounds and they have actually changed and enriched my concepts=20
>of 'the making of tone'. It has however become clear that, in order to get=
=20
>a distinguishable result from these punchings, the instrument has to meet=
=20
>certain conditions and I shall repeat what I wrote about those conditions=
=20
>yesterday :
>
>quote:
>One thing I have learned about this new Wurzen punching, is, that if an=20
>instrument has not been regulated the right way, or when an instrument has=
=20
>very loud hammers, you will not hear any difference.
>You will hear a difference though when the instrument has been regulated=20
>the right way, and when the hammers have a more or less 'normal' voicing,=
=20
>i.e. not really too loud, and not really too soft.
>There is of course a wide scale between very soft and very loud, but=20
>then..... those two are extremes.
>
>The influence of the new tapered Wurzen punching is subtle, and can only=20
>be heard on an instrument which has been regulated and voiced according to=
=20
>'normal' professional standards.
>The feel/touch of the new punching on the other hand, is an other case :=20
>'any' regulation becomes more clear and more defined when you install=20
>these punchings. How can it not be the case?
>It is a more dense material with a very satisfying elasticity which Vladan=
=20
>Temer described so clearly before when he tested several kinds of=
punchings.
>That means that a key dip of 10 mm is a key dip of 10 mm.
>No more, and no less.
>That in itself makes all the difference.
>unquote.
>
>It also becomes clear that, although I have written about this issue quite=
=20
>a number of times, the principle of why a firmer punching has such an=20
>influence is not fully understood by some technicians.
>For those who do not fully understand this, I will have to repeat myself=20
>again (and I apologize for those who know about it already) :
>
>Look at the key as if it were a sea saw with two little children on it.
>Normally speaking, when the sea saw comes down, it bumps into the ground a=
=20
>bit, but, in order to prevent the children from getting hurt, a rubber=20
>tyre is put on the ground on both ends to soften the shock.
>Nevertheless, when it goes a little rough, the child on the high end of=20
>the sea saw has to hold the handle tightly, so that it will not fly off=20
>when the sea saw hits the ground a little hard.
>Now we take away the rubber tires...
>The sea saw will really bang hard into the firm underground, and the=20
>bigger shock, caused by it, is transferred immediately to the high end of=
=20
>the sea saw.
>The child sitting on the high end may get airborne, handle or no handle.
>This transfer of energy is easy to understand and it proves how the shock=
=20
>of a key hitting firmer 'ground' causes a more 'defined' touch, and a=20
>louder, and sometimes clearer, tone.
>
>The new Wurzen punching feels more firm than most other punching, but it=20
>is not too firm.
>When we compare it with another punching (for instance under the next=20
>key), we notice immediately that the softer punching feels more spongy and=
=20
>that after touch is less precise.
>The firmer Wurzen punching feels a little more firm, makes it possible to=
=20
>regulate a very precise after touch, and hence causes a stronger transfer=
=20
>of energy because of the more efficient regulation.
>On top of that, the extra firmness also causes a stronger reaction=20
>straight to the hammer and we can instantly hear the difference between=20
>the key with the softer punching. Sometimes it even seems a little dull,=20
>and most pianists get very excited and immediately want the new stuff (;=
>))
>I have showed and explained this phenomenon to many people here, and I=20
>always let them memorize touch and sound first, before inserting a Wurzen=
=20
>sample under the very same key.
>I then let them try it out for themselves, so that I am not able to=20
>suggest anything to them.
>In all these cases, the reaction was one of disbelieve and sometimes great=
=20
>surprise, and I always urge them to repeat the procedure over and over=20
>again so that they are absolutely convinced that it is not a hoax.
>
>So again, if any of you can not tell the difference, it maybe due to :
>A badly regulated instrument : the malfunctioning action makes it=20
>impossible to distinguish any difference.
>A badly voiced instrument : the too soft or too hard hammers make it=20
>impossible to distinguish any difference.
>A front punching which is just as firm as the Wurzen replacement.
>Your maybe lost your finest sense of touch and maybe also your finest=20
>sense of hearing.
>
>I hope the above helps to make why this new punching is a truly great=20
>improvement.
>
>
>
>friendly greetings
>from
>Andr=E9 Oorebeek
>
>www.concertpianoservice.nl
>
>"Where music is no harm can be"
>
>
>
>
>On 2-apr-05, at 6:59, jason kanter wrote:
>
>>I'd like to hazard a guess about how these punchings are able to affect=20
>>tone.
>>
>>Firstly let's admit the logical problem. If you look at the mechanical=20
>>model, all the motion that contributes to the hammer contacting the=20
>>string occurs before the key bottoms out on the punching. So,=20
>>theoretically, it is difficult to account for Andre's claims about this=20
>>improved tone. We can admit logically that the *feel* of the action may=20
>>be quite different because of the punching, because the experience of=20
>>hitting bottom is such a great portion of the artist's experience. OK.=20
>>But the *tone*? Is this magical thinking? Or may there be a more subtle=20
>>explanation that satisfies logic?
>>
>>The truth, I suspect, is in the marvelous nervous structure leading to=20
>>the artist's fingertips. The regulation of aftertouch is, let's say, 10x=
=20
>>more precise with the antares punching than with a too-soft punching. I=20
>>suspect that the fingers, finding a much more precise bottom, are able to=
=20
>>deliver that much more precise a blow. Having played and found this=20
>>certain bottom, the *fingers* are now much more sure of how much force to=
=20
>>use in the attack on the keys. This is what affects the tone. The=20
>>artist's touch is made more effective by the clean bottom.
>>
>>Does this idea play? Or am I making a rationalization for magical=
thinking?
>>
>>jason
>
>
>
>On 2-apr-05, at 12:41, Richard Brekne wrote:
>
>
>
>>You might also add in that for louder levels of play the key actually=20
>>bottoms out before the hammer hits the string. The end point condition=20
>>for key travel then becomes significant in terms of how much energy it=20
>>absorbs or not. The action has a certain catapult affect here with=20
>>whatever stored energy in the system wanting release as soon as=20
>>possible. I wont get into whether any of that can or cant be released in=
=20
>>time as that discussion has been backed and forthed a few times already.=
=20
>>But I will sign under that the effect is obvious from the standpoint of=20
>>what the fingers feel and ears percieve when changing the type of=20
>>punchings. Also, as Andre pointed out. A well regulated instrument is=20
>>necessary to get this far in the first place. An action that is not well=
=20
>>regulated disperses much of the energy around in various forms of waste=20
>>to begin with yes... ?
>>
>>
>>Cheers
>>RicB
>>
>>Hi Jason.
>>
>>I agree with your thoughts about the importance on the sound of the =3D
>>pianist's feel at the fingertips.
>>But there is another thing that is easy to experiment : the influence of =
=3D
>>the thump of the key landing on the keyframe on the final sound of the =3D
>>note being played. More than that, not only the sound of the very thump =
=3D
>>here mentionned, but also the way this impulsion feeds back to all the =3D
>>strings via the keybed, the rim, the soundboard and the bridge, and =3D
>>gives extra energy to the vibration of the string and the whole acoustic =
=3D
>>machine, and mixes up with the thump of the hammer and hammer shank at =3D
>>hammer-string contact time. You can easily isolate that thump by =3D
>>removing a hammer from the hammer rail and playing the corresponding =3D
>>note (with the action in the piano) : the key knocking sound you hear =3D
>>(emphasized very much if you depress the demper pedal) is really part of =
=3D
>>the overall sound. Now, change the punching, the sound will change =3D
>>accordingly. What is magic is how the final acoustic result of some =3D
>>blends of impulsions make you feel good, while other (only slightly =3D
>>different) blends, not so.
>>What I found great at Andr=3DE9's punchings is that they have exactly the=
=3D
>>right firmness : harder ones tend to make a disagreable thump (tac tac =3D
>>tac) in the trebble, and softer ones won't give you the nice end of dip =
=3D
>>feeling (and regulation), and will absorb more of the energy of the key =
=3D
>>thump.
>>
>>Best regards.
>>
>>St=3DE9phane Collin.
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>pianotech list info:=20
>><https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives>http://www.ptg.org/mailman/=
listinfo/pianotech=20
>>
>>
>
>
>
></blockquote></x-html>
---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/b4/ab/2f/e5/attachment.htm
---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC