string terminations

[gordon stelter]

Personally, I sense that the vibrations are
transmitted as shock waves through the bridge, which
then express themselves as motion ( audible sound ) in
whatever portions of  the board will most readily
resonate at that frequency.
    But, then, I'm just and idjit, as I've been
reminded again and again on this list.
     Thump


--- Andrew and Rebeca  Anderson <anrebe@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:

> I wonder if the bridge would move visibly for the
> lower monochord notes.
> Andrew
> At 02:46 PM 8/15/2005, you wrote:
> >Hello all.
> >
> >Reading this thread, I have (perhaps naively) 
> >done the experience of hitting vertically one 
> >single string installed in a piano , and 
> >horizontally with a loose hammer I hold in my 
> >hand.  I was surprised to hear how much 
> >difference there is in sound.  When struck 
> >vertically, the string produces much more volume 
> >and pleasant sound than when struck horizontally. 
> This is new to me.
> >Looking at the very nice documents posted by Pr. 
> >S. Birkett, I noticed that you can't see the 
> >bridge move under influence of the strings.  Is 
> >this because the magnitude of bridge motion is 
> >invisible at this scale, or because the bridge 
> >doesn't move that much, being after all a node in
> the whole story ?
> >Just wondering.
> >
> >Best regards.
> >
> >Stéphane Collin.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message ----- From: "Ric Brekne"
> <ricbrek@broadpark.no>
> >To: "pianotech" <pianotech@ptg.org>
> >Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 8:48 PM
> >Subject: string terminations
> >
> >
> >>Hi Calin.
> >>
> >>My point was simply to point to information 
> >>compiled by those scientists that have actually 
> >>done some hard research. Most of what is tossed
> around back and forth here
> >>is speculation to some degree or another. Not 
> >>that that is a bad thing mind you. But to at 
> >>least read what research and real 
> >>experimentation has been done seems to my mind 
> >>a good idea before one starts drawing up any
> conclusions.
> >>
> >>Personally, I find the vertical vibration claim 
> >>quite plausible, and there seems to be
> >>some basic maths that back it up. But I will 
> >>refer any interested parties to the persons
> >>who've published on the matter. Both Stuart and 
> >>Wapin have documentation worth reading.
> >>
> >>One other point.... just for thought.  However 
> >>a whole system achieves longer sustain,
> >>the string simply has to vibrate longer as a 
> >>result.  Without string vibration then there is 
> >>no system vibration either. So what exactly 
> >>about the vertical termination that causes this 
> >>in both the Wapin and the Stuart terminations 
> >>(one with virtual no mass increase, the other with
> about 1 kilo) ?
> >>
> >>Like I say,  I find reading the available 
> >>literature on the subject matter valuable.
> >>
> >>Cheers
> >>RicB
> >>
> >>------
> >>The "vertical vibration claim doesn't seem very 
> >>plausible to me (but i don't have any 
> >>counter-arguments). I just think the way a 
> >>bridge agraffe can improve sustain is just by 
> >>virtue of its greater hardness (and weight), 
> >>compared to a conventional bridge pin, which 
> >>seems to be a pretty flexible contraption.
> >>
> >>Regards,
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>pianotech list info:
> https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives
> >>
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >pianotech list info:
> https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> pianotech list info:
> https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com