Jim Ellis wrote: Depending upon what you want the piano to sound like and to do, there >is an optimum hammer "weight" (mass) as related to the mass and tension of >the string. There are all sorts of trade-off's here. More weight, more >mass, longer dwell time, more relative fundamental tone, better >soft-playing control under some conditions but at the expense of slower >repetition, heavier feel, etc. Less weight, less mass, shorter dwell, >faster response, brighter tone assuming same felt hardness, etc, etc. >There is no one combination that's either good or bad. It depends upon >what you want from the piano. > >Ed, if this is material you are working up for a JOURNAL article or column, >you need to tell us up front. Jim >> Jim-No plans for an article on this. I'm just responding to earlier questions and posts about touchweight in vertical pianos. My points were 1) in some vertical pianos, an adjustment to hammer weight can make a great improvement in the expressive capacity of the piano 2) This can't be calculated with static up and down weight formulas, but it is fairly easy to add a litle hammer weight and play the piano to test the result. I appreciate your comments! Ed Sutton
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC