To be more precise, I guess it's a twisting force at the bridge. On 5/3/06, Farrell <mfarrel2 at tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > > Where do you get any sideways tension? As long as the backscale is roughly > parallel with the speaking length, the bridge will not be tensioning or > compressing the soundboard in any manner. > > Terry Farrell > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Kazuo Yoshizaki <matrasimca at gmail.com> > > This was what I heard from a piano tuner in Paris who asked Mr. Paulello > about it. There may be something lost in translation, but I just assume > anything that adds stress to the board inhibits the movement of the board. > If you have no downbearing, no mass and no tension sideways, the board moves > more freely, doesn't it? (Of course that is not realistic.) > > On 5/2/06, Ron Nossaman <rnossaman at cox.net> wrote: > > > > > > > Yes, the string bearing is reversed, but the concept behind is that > > you > > > don't have tension sideways on the bridge, which helps the soundboard > > > vibrate more freely. > > > > > > Yoshi > > > > > > And how does that work? In my world, the soundboard isn't > > changed by the string termination at the bridge, and will > > vibrate pretty much the same with either system. The real > > difference is in the mass on the bridge which, if anything, > > will impede the vibrational freedom (amplitude, in this case) > > of the soundboard assembly by lowering it's resonant > > frequency, increasing it's mechanical impedance, and extending > > sustain. > > Ron N > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20060503/c9d6682d/attachment.html
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC