One more thought, for now. We already know about things that could go wrong with a CC board. Here I'd like to speculate about something that could go wrong with a RC&S board, and I'd appreciate any comments. Typically, as I understand it, the RC&S panel is dried down to about 6.5% EMC so that the panel undergoes relatively less compression and the panel itself is therefore somewhat less stiff. If for some reason, the panel, say, were not to be dried down adequately, then the stiffness of the assembly could still be achieved because the ribs, bearing most of the load, could still be compressed and bear much of the load. All seems fine. But because the panel was not adequately prepared, the stiffness normally achieved by the panel itself would be somewhat less and its contribution to tone production would be altered. A softer panel with altered impedance characteristics might require a softer hammer with its own upper partials dampening effects. The softer panel itself might also have the effect of dampening the upper partials to some degree. This combined effect of softer hammer, softer panel, might produce a tone that while having adequate power (loudness) might not have the balance of partials to make the tone interesting, lively, expressive, you choose your favorite word. So control of the panel's EMC, while seemingly not as critical for purposes of achieving stiffness in the assembly overall, might still be very critical in order to achieve a certain tonal balance. The next question: How much stiffness is required in the panel itself to produce a desirable balance of partials or will cause the necessary use of a hammer of enough firmness and density to accentuate the upper partials the degree necessary. Another way to say it is: producing a soundboard which requires only a very soft hammer to drive it may limit the expressive quality of the instrument. David Love davidlovepianos@comcast.net -----Original Message----- From: pianotech-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org] On Behalf Of David Love Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 10:33 PM To: 'Pianotech' Subject: RE: More CC vs RC questions was RE: Killer Octave & Pitch Raise Actually, I think the RC&S board doesn't seem to require as bright a hammer because the panel is less stiff (not the assembly, but the panel) and therefore the impedance characteristics are different. I'm not sure that a softer hammer will produce "sparkly highs" it's just that it doesn't take so much of a hard hammer to get the volume out of the instrument. That fact that the hammer is softer may, in fact, reduce the sparkly highs as a softer hammer tends to damp higher partials, and produce the impression of a narrower or more focused tonal spectrum for the same volume. Is that not possible? David Love davidlovepianos@comcast.net Regarding your second question... If the RC/S board doesn't require as bright a hammer to produce sparkly highs, perhaps the voicing technician has more latitude to voice the hammer to emphasize the fundamentals. The result of the RC/S design may well be a richer sound spectrum. Of course that would be my apriori assumption about any design that is more efficient. In answer to your question, I suspect an RC/S board would be more capable of producing whatever tonal qualities the voicing technician wished to achieve, whether it is a darker sound (stronger fund. and weak overtones) or a brighter sound (weak fund. and strong overtones). My point was/is that the more rapid changes in spectral content throughout a note's sustain on a CC board might result in a desirable expressive quality to that design. Peace, Sarah _______________________________________________ pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives _______________________________________________ pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC