[CAUT] The fundamental - Where is it?

[Fred Sturm]

On Apr 1, 2010, at 10:14 AM, Laurence Libin wrote:

> We need to be careful interpreting Meyer's test results in a  
> performance context. For example, while the una corda diminishes  
> loudness less than might be expected, this assumes the same force of  
> blow with and without it;

	Yes, one assumes that the experiment on which the data is based was  
conducted with precisely the same force of blow. What I draw from it  
(assuming parameters were well controlled, and "una corda" actually  
meant the hammer striking two strings) is the importance of una corda  
voicing. It also makes clear that in the common (wrongly regulated)  
condition, where shift is equal to distance between strings and moves  
the hammer so the two strings are struck by grooves in the hammer, the  
sound with and without the pedal is "equally loud" ("The soft pedal on  
this piano doesn't work," says the customer). I guess the coupling  
somehow means that there is a similar transfer of force to the bridge.  
And since the grooves will create a similar partial spectrum, it will  
sound essentially the same. Also true with extra hard, unvoiced hammers.

> One measure of a sensitive piano might be the degree to which the  
> tone changes in tandem with dynamic level, assuming this is  
> desirable (it makes the music more colorful to my ear). Old pianos,  
> especially with Viennese actions, tend to be good at this, partly  
> because the flexibility of the shank and the action set-up change  
> the strike point (between PP and FF) more than normally occurs on a  
> modern piano. Among other factors are hammer resilience

And voicing technique, together with hammer quality.

Regards,
Fred Sturm
fssturm at unm.edu
"I am only interested in music that is better than it can be played."  
Schnabel