[CAUT] tone color

[Ed Sutton]

The new Mason & Hamlin CC with composite action needs to be considered as 
well.
The change to composite action parts has given this instrument a bolder 
range of response, more power with perhaps less distortion of tone. 
Presumably due to less hammer wobble in the power stroke.
It would be interesting to hear what composite hammer shanks would do on Ron 
N's D redesign. Or on a standard NYD.
Ed Sutton

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Love" <davidlovepianos at comcast.net>
To: <caut at ptg.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 11:49 PM
Subject: Re: [CAUT] tone color


>I think the issue being discussed has less to do with shear volume than it
> does with the ability to change the balance of how the partials develop
> depending on how you strike the note.  This may be related to the
> consistency of the hammer mostly, however the requirement for the
> consistency of the hammer is related to the belly and what it will 
> tolerate.
> Back to the first point, consider the classic description of a hammer as 
> an
> iron fist in a velvet glove. Not a great description really when you
> consider things like resilience and flexibility but one thing that it
> suggests is that once compressed beyond that velvety outer layer the 
> hammer
> should be able to influence the relative amplitude of the different 
> partials
> in such a way that you can get a brighter attack and sharply accented 
> notes
> that stand out in contrast.  This is done to some degree by having a 
> hammer
> where the consistency changes considerably below the outer layers. 
> Perhaps
> there's a better or even more accurate way to explain it.  A concert
> instrument that employs a full dynamic range doesn't do so by just being
> able to play from loud to soft, it does so by being able to influence
> brightness and contrast by the manner in which the note is struck and the
> hammer is compressed to harder layers that lie below the surface.  If you
> produce a belly that wants for a softer hammer deeper into the core then 
> you
> will lose that ability to some degree.  If you lose it enough you will
> diminish the expressive range of the instrument.  It's that same ability
> that allows the piano to cut through other instruments with a concerto
> piano, though that's an extreme case where you have a hard time turning it
> off.  But in most regular concert situations, when the piano is voiced 
> well
> and has that particular dynamic range, you can broaden the tonal pallet 
> that
> way.  With respect to these redesigns, at least the ones that I have been
> involved with, the issue of hard hammer tolerance has been discussed
> frequently, if not publicly then privately.  But it's a real issue if what
> you're after is what I have described.  That's been my experience with 
> these
> so far and while it isn't an issue much of the time, in this particular 
> case
> (concert stage type of instrument) it is.  When executed properly, they
> produce a beautiful and controlled sound.  But the need for a hammer with
> that particular soft consistency limits the expressive potential.
>
> A few comments have been made about the Overs piano but if you look at the
> hammer on that piano it was nothing like the hammers that are going on 
> these
> designs that we're talking about.  It was a massive, Abel performance
> hammer.  Very firm in its core along with a very high strike weight.  The
> belly of the Overs piano was very different in its weighting and hammer
> requirements.  While they both employ some similar features, I don't think
> you can really compare the two in terms of panel characteristics or rib
> scales.
>
> David Love
> www.davidlovepianos.com
>
>