[pianotech] Hammer Technique: was Q & A Roundtable

[Joe Goss]

Grand Upright?
Joe Goss BSMusEd MMusEd RPT
imatunr at srvinet.com
www.mothergoosetools.com
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Love" <davidlovepianos at comcast.net>
To: <pianotech at ptg.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 9:01 AM
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Hammer Technique: was Q & A Roundtable


> No, in the 12 - 3 (let's say 12:01) position the flexing of the pin by
> virtue of pulling on the lever is away from the speaking length and will
> drive the pitch sharp.  Only in a position between 6 and 12 does the 
> pulling
> of the tuning lever naturally flex the pin toward the speaking segment.
> Think quadrants relative to the direction of the speaking length as I
> suggested in the longer piece.  Tuning at 1:30 on a grand is like tuning 
> at
> 10:30 on an upright.  If you tune at 1:30 on a grand you flex the pin away
> from the speaking length, if you tune at 1:30 on an upright you flex the 
> pin
> toward the speaking length.  That outlines two distinct differences in how
> you approach the target pitch when tuning both from the 1:30 position. 
> The
> natural flexing of the pin is moving the pitch in opposite directions. 
> You
> need to compensate for that fact when you determine your degree of
> overshoot.
>
> The fact is (and I'm not necessarily addressing you but the general
> discussion) most people just find a way to do what's necessary without
> really thinking about it.  The movements they make are kind of instinctive
> and part of a feedback loop.  That's ok and necessary in fact as a part of
> the process.  My tendency, however, is to try and understand what's 
> actually
> happening and thereby try and use that to help me to control things 
> better.
> I find it helps me in terms of speed and stability since it gives me an
> awareness of what I'm actually compensating for when I apply back pressure
> or whatever movements I happen to use which are necessary.  It helps to
> establish a general pattern of movements through the piano rather than a
> sort of random and different approach to each pin as some have suggested 
> is
> their normal experience.  I don't find that to be true.  Working to 
> develop
> an awareness of what's actually going on and what and how I can control 
> it,
> I find, makes the process more consistent from pin to pin and thereby more
> efficient and faster.  In my world, speed counts.  Not at the expense of
> accuracy or stability.  But if I can do it faster rather than slower with
> the same result, I choose faster.  But I'm just speaking from my own
> experience.  For me, getting through the entire piano in 45 minutes is
> common, and I don't feel like I'm rushing or taking shortcuts, it's just a
> matter of efficiency.  YMMV.
>
> David Love
> www.davidlovepianos.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On 
> Behalf
> Of Joe Goss
> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 7:38 AM
> To: pianotech at ptg.org
> Subject: Re: [pianotech] Hammer Technique: was Q & A Roundtable
>
> Hi David,
> In my thinking that happens automatically when tuning hammer is at 12 to 3
> and one is using a 20% head. Less at 12 and more at 3
> Joe Goss BSMusEd MMusEd RPT
> imatunr at srvinet.com
> www.mothergoosetools.com
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "David Love" <davidlovepianos at comcast.net>
> To: <pianotech at ptg.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 8:22 AM
> Subject: Re: [pianotech] Hammer Technique: was Q & A Roundtable
>
>
>>I suppose I could have worded it more precisely but it's not at all
>>nonsense
>> and it's easy to demonstrate if you're open to it.  You can flex the pin
>> forward while you are turning it such that the pitch actually drops in
>> spite
>> of the fact that you are turning it in the sharp direction.  Then when 
>> you
>> release the flex which, in this case, is pushing the pitch to the flat
>> side
>> more than the twisting of the pin is pushing it to the sharp side, the
>> pitch
>> will climb to your target.   The tension in the first segment never rises
>> above the target tension.  A controlled flexing like this in which the
>> flexing offsets the twisting means that the higher amount of tension 
>> often
>> left in that first section (which tends to cause stability problems with
>> the
>> pitch moving flat) never occurs.  That's my point but feel free to parse
>> it
>> any way that gets you off.
>>
>> David Love
>> www.davidlovepianos.com
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On
>> Behalf
>> Of Ron Nossaman
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 6:59 AM
>> To: pianotech at ptg.org
>> Subject: Re: [pianotech] Hammer Technique: was Q & A Roundtable
>>
>> On 2/2/2011 2:07 AM, David Love wrote:
>>> Overshooting means that you increase the tension in the first segment of
>> the
>>> string (the segment leaving the tuning pin) to the first friction point
>>> before the  speaking length moves.
>>
>> Nonsense. That has nothing whatsoever to do with overshooting. If you're
>> going to raise the pitch of the speaking length with the tuning pin,
>> you'll increase the tension in the first segment first and most. That's
>> not hammer technique. That's kindergarten physics.
>>
>>
>>
>>>If you tune with counter pressure applied to the
>>> tuning lever that compensates for the twisting of the pin, you can move
>> the
>>> pin in the block without increasing the tension in that first section, 
>>> no
>>> overshoot.  The risk of exceeding the break point then is minimized.
>>
>> Absolute nonsense. It's still the higher tension in the first segment
>> that pulls the string from the speaking length through the agraffe or
>> capo.
>> Ron N
>>
>>
>
>
>