This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment Hi Vladan, For best expressiveness, the musician would probably like to have as much of those 10 mm available to modulate the pressure without feeling that he is moving the key stick through molasses. If he doesn't have the physical ability to redu! ce the force quickly, he will feel that the action is "temperamental". The situation changes when very fast playing is required. The requirement for a precisely controlled dynamic level may give way to the need for speed. A fast (low friction) action becomes advantageous. I think that pianists who like to play fast pieces and have phenomenal control over their touch may prefer an action with very low friction. They have the ability to put just the right amount of energy into the hammer in the shortest amount of time, basically using the initial stage of the key movement to send the hammer on its way with the precise amount of momentum. Since they did all the work in the initial stage of the key movement, they are free to quickly move on to the next note. Hmmmm.... I do agree that there are distinct fast- and slow- modes of control. = Slow-mode involves closed-loop feedback for the the individual note, in = which attention is paid to the movement of the key, and pressure on the = key is modulated accordingly. Fast-mode control involves open loop = activity for actuation of a single key. Control occurs over the course = of several notes. It's a bit like the difference between curling and = throwing a baseball. Curling is a very odd sport in which participants = with brooms sweep a path in front of a sliding stone to change and = correct its direction as it moves across a frozen pond. (The Scots do = this, right???) A baseball is, in fact, thrown, and no amount of = feedback will change its course, once it leaves the hand. A pitcher may = change how he pitches the ball if he sees he's pitching consistently = high or low or left or right. However, there is no feedback control = over the individual ball. So the point becomes one of where the switch-over occurs between = "curling" and "baseball" modes of piano play. That's really a matter of = how fast one's reflexes are, and how fast the person can *think* about = every nuance of key movement, in order to control it. I submit that = there are very few situations that are fine-controllable in the way you = have described. Let's consider a very familiar and slooooow piece: Beethoven's = Moonlight Sonata, 1st Movement. (See the score: = http://www.mfiles.co.uk/Scores/moonlight-movement1.pdf) The opening = note (or three notes) demand the fine level of feedback you're talking = about. The pianist has as yet been unable to calibrate to the piano. = It's a bit like a French horn player opening up with the first note or = two of a solo. It's an awkward moment, made less awkward only by the = stability and predictability of the instrument. By the time the pianist = reaches the second beat, he or she should be calibrated and should be = playing much more smoothly. Speaking for myself, when I reach this = second beat, I've switched wholely from curling mode to baseball mode. = My next "curling" note is the downbeat of measure 10, which requires = great subtlety. Then beats 1 and 3 of measure 12 and beat one of = measure 13. All the rest is baseball. It continues much like this, = until the end, with mostly "baseball" notes and a few "curls" thrown in. = The last three notes, of course, are very decidely "curling" = experiences. Now this is a VERY slow and subtle piece, and it's at = least 95% "baseball" to me. So am I just a "slow" sort of musician who doesn't have the level of = control that most musicians do? No, I don't think so. My reaction = times are actually unusually rapid. I know this because nobody could = beat my reaction times in an Experimental Psych Lab course I took during = my undergraduate days. Also nobody could beat my finger tap rates, both = L and R hand, in a Neuropsych course I took during graduate school. I'm = older now, but even so, a teenager or two has been impressed that I'm = almost as good at video games as they are -- without practicing them all = day. Now, I'm not the fastest of pianists, not even close, and my = abilities are only modest. But still, my point is that I'm not slow = either. Even with pretty good reflexes and reaction times, I find = myself ***UNABLE*** to micro-control the movement of a key during even = slow/moderately paced musical passages. Thus, the "braking" power of = friction is of no benefit to me. It's only a nuisance, because it = creates more work, slows me down, and adds to the unpredictable nature = of the action response (wherever friction is not dead-even from key to = key). Perhaps concert pianists can achieve this control (or might claim = that they do), but I would be very skeptical. Think of this also from an information processing standpoint. Can you = imagine the amount of data throughput that would be required to achieve = the type of control you suggest? A passage of even moderate speed would = crash a computer easily! Pianodisk systems don't employ feedback loops, = to my knowledge, and this would be why. I'm simply not smart and/or = fast enough to handle that sort of data throughput. Moreover, my nerve = conduction velocities could not even begin to keep up with the relay of = info between my arms/fingers and brain. No way, no how. Even while I'm = playing the opening 8th notes of the Moonlight Sonata, there's only time = enough for 20 round trips of information to and from my arms/fingers per = note, not counting the most time-intensive part of the entire feedback = loop, which is the processing of information on each round trip. = Realistically, I'd put it at about 1 or two round trips, max. I'd say = that 10 or 20 measures of microcontrolling each note would be enough to = drive most people batty. So I don't disagree with you in principle, only in practice. I submit = that the "phenomenal control" to which you refer is actually quite = garden-variety and, further, that the low friction actions that you say = may benefit those with "phenomenal control" would benefit most pianists. = Finally, I repeat that we've never given these piano characteristics a = fair try. Ric, you say that fly-away actions have been available for a = long time, but how long have we had fly-away actions with rock-solid = rigidity? Now that's another question entirely... Peace, Sarah PS Sorry folks! I didn't know (or at least didn't remember?) that there = is a separate joke list. <shrug> PPS Now if you want to talk about letoff clearance and control... = *THAT* is an issue that matters a lot!! ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/e0/51/d7/e3/attachment.htm ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC