[pianotech] Hammer Technique: was Q & A Roundtable

[Ron Nossaman]

On 2/2/2011 11:34 AM, David Love wrote:
> I'll address both of these separate questions.
>
> First, (Mike) let's be clear, I didn't say that the first segment didn't
> increase while the speaking length did, I said the first segment didn't
> increase *above* the level where the speaking segment ends up.

You keep repeating the same misconception over and over again and not 
thinking about what you're saying. The first segment *HAD* to have 
exceeded the final tension if it was to overcome the friction in the 
bearing surfaces to pull the speaking length up to final tension. This 
is as basic a truth as there is here. Look it in the eye and think about 
it instead of avoiding it and you'll see that's right.


 > So, in
> answer to both your queries, that's that beauty of an ETD (yet another use).
> You don't have to measure the actual tension to know that you didn't need to
> increase the tension above the target.  You can easily demonstrate that the
> pitch can be made to rise to the target from below and when you stabilize
> the pin you can see that there is no change to the sharp side which needs to
> be settled back down indicating that no additional or excess tension was
> stored in the front segment.  It's deductive reasoning.

No, it's faulty reasoning, and if your chapter let you get away with 
presenting it this way, shame on them all.

Ron N