[CAUT] Voicing method/analogy

[Richard Brekne]

In principle this is sound reasoning as far as it goes. It does not take 
into consideration however the physical limitations imposed on hammer 
velocity for a given hammer mass in the context of the system we call 
the action. Nor does it take into consideration things like increased 
flexing of the shank, the requirements for counterbalancing both in 
static and dynamics senses. All else being equal... this would work just 
as well as Ed McMorrows Light Hammer philosophy.  In his case.. the lack 
of weight would be compensated by the increased velocity yeilding the 
same nett impact force.... velocity times mass.  If it was just as 
simple as this... then any combination of velocity times mass that 
equaled any other given combination would yeild the same force on 
whatever stopping force was encountered. But as we know... it isnt.

Not to say that to some degree one can employ these ideas to achieve 
some resultant effect... but I dont really think these have been 
quantified really yet.  Clearly, IMHE in anycase.... an equal velocity 
times mass given to significantly different hammer masses will not yeild 
the same tonal affects no matter what voicing is done.... but just what 
exactly are all the contributing causes to the resultant differences are 
not, I think, known at this point... only guessed at.

I find folks attempting to use hammer weights that are equivalants of 
what might be called 3/4 over load Strike Weights... ala Stanwood... 
i.e. a level above his smart chart hammers.  Bass SW's starting at 15 
grams....  Personally I find this kind of thing .... well untenable in 
the end.  Just as much so as I find the extreme light hammers proposed 
by McMorrow (whome I have great respect for as I do Stanwood).  Using 
Stanwoods gauge again... I see a max SW curve of perhaps 1/2 tops and a 
minimum of perhaps 1/4 medium as in the useble range for about 99.8% of 
anything I can possibly imagine as acceptable. Outside of these mass 
levels you run into all manner of other considerations that need to be 
delt with... all yeilding in the end what is what I believe all the data 
out there tells us will not be met with acceptance in the world of 
pianists. There are always the exceptions... Horowitz comes to mind... 

I just took a 20 year old Steinway D that had had a hammer change done a 
few years back without regard to key leading. The Strikeweight Curve was 
fairly even and ended up a pretty smoothed out 1/4 top.  Ratio (ala  
Stanwood) of 5.7 +.... and I balance the keys to just slightly above his 
recommended maximums to end up with a 36 gram BW.  The pianist... one of 
todays Rubenstein types.... simply loved the touch.  New bushings and 
polished key pins of course helped as well...   I think the most 
important thing to remember in voicing using hammer mass as a tool.... 
is to keep things in reasonable ball parks. No one is going to hit a 580 
foot home run.

Just some thoughts from the other side of the pond

Cheers
RicB


         It is well established that adding weight to a hammer changes
    the tone.
    Flexibility or springiness of the material added is also a factor.
    Analogy:
    A student railroad engineer was instructed to bring a 100 car train to a
    precision stop.  Immediately after doing so, there came a jolt, and the
    locomotives were pushed well past the target before stopping again.  The
    student was instructed that brakes should have been deployed to
    compress the
    train prior to the stop.   Stopping with a stretched train allowed
    the rear
    of the train to still be moving forward after the front had stopped
    so when
    the "slack ran in" the front was pushed forward.

    Consider a piano hammer as a train, the strike point being the
    locomotive,
    and the tail the rear cars.  A hard hammer with no spring is like a
    compressed train, where the tail stops at the same time as the
    strike point.
    In a soft hammer the weight of the tail is still moving upwards
    after the
    strike point has stopped.   A factor in tone is from the type of
    stop made,
    or how much "run in of slack" or "after push" occurs when strike point
    stops.

    You can voice rock hard hammer heads by adding controlled flexible
    weight
    appendages to create the optimum amount of springy "after push" or
    "run in
    of slack".  Choose a glue or caulk which dries flexibly or springy
    and add
    to the inside of the tail cove. Trim and shape it for weight and
    amount of
    flex.   A pronounced blob of glue of a given amount will have more
    flex than
    the same amount spread in a thin layer inside the tail cove.   This is a
    viable voicing method to develop and use in your arsenal.

    -Mike Jorgensen 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/caut.php/attachments/20070526/61b10a3f/attachment.html