Stanwood writes: >Larry, > >It's refreshing to hear your sensible logical analysis which is born of >observing pianos in the real world. I refer the light hammer tone as >"Antique". -------------- Am I reading too much into this statement if I understand you to imply that a "sensible, logical analysis" born of real world observations is dependent on the conclusion that one prefers heavy hammers? I have heard and played both full and low projection each from heavy and light hammers. Not infrequently, a player has complained of dull tone, especially in the treble, and a little weight reduction worked miracles (without reducing bore length). What we need is a spectrum analysis of a heavy hammer/full leverage, then, that same hammer should be reduced at least 1 gram and put with low leverage parts on that same note on the same piano. After this, I would thin the low leverage shank and read the spectrum a third time. I am currently trying to coordinate such an experiment with our Physics Dept. Unfortunately, my best connection to the Physics lab just retired this spring. Everyone interested in this subject should make a point to hear Stephen Birkett at our CAUT forum in Dearborn. In the meantime, I still insist that good, full tone is possible from either heavy or light hammers and I offer both in our hall. However, the players that I work with seem to be more interested in the touch and responsivness of the action than with ultimate projection. What they want is a spacial sound and a quick, responsive touch. The one with heavy hammers is currently sitting backstage. Dennis Johnson St. Olaf College
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC