Personally, I sense that the vibrations are transmitted as shock waves through the bridge, which then express themselves as motion ( audible sound ) in whatever portions of the board will most readily resonate at that frequency. But, then, I'm just and idjit, as I've been reminded again and again on this list. Thump --- Andrew and Rebeca Anderson <anrebe@sbcglobal.net> wrote: > I wonder if the bridge would move visibly for the > lower monochord notes. > Andrew > At 02:46 PM 8/15/2005, you wrote: > >Hello all. > > > >Reading this thread, I have (perhaps naively) > >done the experience of hitting vertically one > >single string installed in a piano , and > >horizontally with a loose hammer I hold in my > >hand. I was surprised to hear how much > >difference there is in sound. When struck > >vertically, the string produces much more volume > >and pleasant sound than when struck horizontally. > This is new to me. > >Looking at the very nice documents posted by Pr. > >S. Birkett, I noticed that you can't see the > >bridge move under influence of the strings. Is > >this because the magnitude of bridge motion is > >invisible at this scale, or because the bridge > >doesn't move that much, being after all a node in > the whole story ? > >Just wondering. > > > >Best regards. > > > >Stéphane Collin. > > > > > > > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- From: "Ric Brekne" > <ricbrek@broadpark.no> > >To: "pianotech" <pianotech@ptg.org> > >Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 8:48 PM > >Subject: string terminations > > > > > >>Hi Calin. > >> > >>My point was simply to point to information > >>compiled by those scientists that have actually > >>done some hard research. Most of what is tossed > around back and forth here > >>is speculation to some degree or another. Not > >>that that is a bad thing mind you. But to at > >>least read what research and real > >>experimentation has been done seems to my mind > >>a good idea before one starts drawing up any > conclusions. > >> > >>Personally, I find the vertical vibration claim > >>quite plausible, and there seems to be > >>some basic maths that back it up. But I will > >>refer any interested parties to the persons > >>who've published on the matter. Both Stuart and > >>Wapin have documentation worth reading. > >> > >>One other point.... just for thought. However > >>a whole system achieves longer sustain, > >>the string simply has to vibrate longer as a > >>result. Without string vibration then there is > >>no system vibration either. So what exactly > >>about the vertical termination that causes this > >>in both the Wapin and the Stuart terminations > >>(one with virtual no mass increase, the other with > about 1 kilo) ? > >> > >>Like I say, I find reading the available > >>literature on the subject matter valuable. > >> > >>Cheers > >>RicB > >> > >>------ > >>The "vertical vibration claim doesn't seem very > >>plausible to me (but i don't have any > >>counter-arguments). I just think the way a > >>bridge agraffe can improve sustain is just by > >>virtue of its greater hardness (and weight), > >>compared to a conventional bridge pin, which > >>seems to be a pretty flexible contraption. > >> > >>Regards, > >> > >>_______________________________________________ > >>pianotech list info: > https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives > >> > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >pianotech list info: > https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives > > > _______________________________________________ > pianotech list info: > https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC