[CAUT] HELP

[Paul T Williams]

Thanks Ed. amd all

I may try some riblets. I  needled a lot and got some good results which 
brought out more reasons why the board is going bad.  Although, good 
things happened!  Lifting strings, tappping bridge pins down, (and 
strings, actually "massaging them into the nook of termination) took out 
almost all the false beats that were bugging me to death.  The sustain is 
very good overall, but the real power isn't there for a 9'.  I think, 
again, this is the soundboard talking to me.  It sounds more like a 7'-er 
in the mid and high treble...The bass is still quite good and I'll finish 
evening it out tomorrow.  Any other hints would be greatly appreciated!! 
How do you all let the piano tell you that the soundboard is going even 
with decent downbearing??? 

Thanks again all!  You're an awesome resource for knowledge

Paul

 



A440A at aol.com 
Sent by: caut-bounces at ptg.org
07/26/2008 09:38 AM
Please respond to
College and University Technicians <caut at ptg.org>


To
caut at ptg.org
cc

Subject
Re: [CAUT] HELP






Paul writes:

<<  I thought I grabbed the acetone to put some 
below the staple to help the fundamentals, but instead, grabbed the 
lacquer!  After seeing what I had done, I quickly grabbed the acetone and 
tried to dilute what I had done.  I'll check it out Sunday or Monday after 

all has dried, but;  Have I ruined these hammers?!?!? 

I doubt it.  What happens below the staple can easily be manipulated by 
working farther up in the hammer. At some point down there, the maker even 
has a 
thick slab of glue that has wicked into the hammer felt! 

>>I thought the Ronsen's didn't need laquer and such. 

    Depends on many things.  Any hammer can be put in a situation where it 
is 
too hard or too soft for the purpose. 
 
>>I was disappointed 
with the initial response.  Now, the bass is good with a 4:1 laquer 
treatment on the lower shoulders--twice in the single strings, but the 
killer octave area is really weak and tinny. >>

      I suppose there is a philosophical perspective at work here ("The 
flow 
of energy through a system tends to organize that system".)  However,  I 
don't 
understand why time is left out of the equation, ie, hammers, initially, 
do 
NOT sound like they will after the first say, 40 hours of play.  I think 
there 
is a reason to do nothing, initially.  (This isn't usually applicable to 
the 
concert stage.) 
      Playing the hammer, after the felt has been stretched, pressed, 
glued, 
shaped, tapered, will cause the felt to change. It moves around, seeking 
equilibrium between the pressure and stretch.  Not only will the surface 
compact, 
and the felt directly below the strings begin to harden,  but the 
fundamental 
structure of the bulk of the felt will become more resilient, (assuming it 
is 
accepting of a needle, and not been soaked in a hardener). 
     I look for a hammer that produces various spectra according to the 
force 
of blow.  Plotted against our hearing bias, there is something very 
non-linear about all this, in terms of response. To get that, for me, 
requires a 
graduated density in the felt, from the contact down to the core.  Early 
in my 
career, I assumed that the rock hard level should be reached only at the 
bottom of 
the felt core, and the softening would be spread over the entire dimension 

from there to strike surface.  This allowed for a maximum range of tone, 
from 
foggy to brilliant, but the weak wristed need not play:  it took a lot of 
muscle 
to use all the range.  Comments like, "sounds good, but it's a lotta work 
to 
get tone", etc.   I have since changed my idea on this. 
         I have gotten good results by leaving a lot more of the hammer's 
"heart" in its original compression, and creating the "non-linear spring" 
in a 
smaller zone, nearer to the surface.  It is a little trickier, but allows 
for a 
longer hammer life and ease of voicing.  A big part of this is letting the 

hammer break in before I begin doing things to it.  I have used so many 
Renner 
Blues, that I can needle them on the bench, before I do anything else. 
They 
usually sound a little "cotton-ish" at first, but after a week or two of 
daily 
play, they require some medium deep needles up around 10:00-11:30 on the 
shoulders to loosen them up to their final voice.  I rarely need to needle 
at 12:00 
on these hammers. 
    The last set of Abel's and Ronsen's have behaved much the same way, 
with 
a few differences. These were mainly in the sense of how quickly they 
broke in 
and the felt seemed a little less resiliant, (judging from the way the 
filed-off pile of felt felt). 
   Loudness depends on the upper partials,  power requires the lower ones. 
 
To combine the two, in an evenly graduated way, is the art of producing a 
piano 
with a "malleable tone".  Pianists instinctively like this, as it allows a 

musical control that is unavailable on a piano that starts and ends with 
one 
tonal character. 
 
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 fantasy football with free live 
scoring. 
Sign up for FanHouse Fantasy Football today.<BR> 
(http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020)</HTML>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/caut.php/attachments/20080728/711cce1a/attachment.html