Finding the strike line another method

[David Love]

It seems like there are two factors (at least) involved in strike point
issues in the upper area.  First is the amount of power for the least amount
of extrusion which causes leakage and loss of power especially through the
capo bar.  A tendency toward weakness or insufficient mass in the
soundboard/bridge in this area might also contribute to the jangly and
hollow sound that is produced when the hammer strikes too far away from the
capo bar--though I'm not sure of the actual mechanics.  Second is finding
that small area between the nodes which, at the upper end of the piano, is a
small target indeed.  Striking on the node will kill that particular
harmonic affecting the timbral balance.  Too large a hammer or too broad a
strike point on the hammer itself can also contribute to a limited timbral
range in that area as well.  

David Love
davidlovepianos at comcast.net 
www.davidlovepianos.com

-----Original Message-----
From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf
Of A440A at aol.com
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 10:02 AM
To: pianotech at ptg.org
Subject: Re: Finding the strike line another method

Ron writes:

<<  The strike line deviations from a straight 

line happen in the low treble section - the killer octave. 

Why? Just hanging the hammers where they work best is good 

enough for getting the job done, but I'd like to know more of 

the why here.  >>

Greetings, 
      I would opine that first we have to define "best".  
Case in point:  A certain hall here has a new Steinway D,(two years old, or 
so).  It has factory hammers with factory hardening in them.  It is regarded
as 
the best piano in the school.  It sounds very powerful and brilliant to the 
pianists while they are playing it.  
       There is another D in this school.  It is 40 years old and has a set 
of Renner Blues in it.  It was always regarded as the lesser piano by the 
faculty,(though at a Liszt festival two years ago, 50% of the out of town
artists 
chose it).  The pianists feel it is weaker and harder to play than the new 
one,(gram weights are within 2 grams of each other).  I have voiced this
older 
piano for the maximum range of tone between ppp and FFF. 
   Last year, both pianos were on stage for concerto practise.  Out in the 
hall, the Renner equipped piano had a much fuller, more powerful sound,while
the 
new piano sounded thin and stringy.  
    While the human ear is more sensitive to the upper frequencies, 
(basically the range of normal human speech,no surprise), acoustic power is
more 
efficiently carried by lower frequencies.  This is why we can hear the bass
drum in 
a marching band from a mile or more away, but as they pass by us on the 
street, it is the piccolo that drills its way through our head!  
    What I am wondering is if shortening the strike point is sacrificing
some 
of the lower spectrum in the killer octave notes and lending emphasis to the

higher partials, thus making it seem as though the piano has more power to
the 
pianist, (or technician).  Has anybody compared a "bent-line" piano with a 
straight-line piano in the venue, from farther out from the stage?  
 
Regards,

Ed Foote RPT 
http://www.uk-piano.org/edfoote/index.html
www.uk-piano.org/edfoote/well_tempered_piano.html
 <BR><BR><BR>**************************************<BR> Get a sneak peek of 
the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour</HTML>