[pianotech] Hammer Technique: was Q & A Roundtable

[David Love]

The better way to say what I intended is that I don't (or try not to) increase the tension in the first segment beyond what is necessary to both pull the speaking length to it's target pitch *and* leave the first segment in a state of equilibrium once that occurs. I try to get to that place without the need for further correction. I want the relaxing of the force that I have applied to the pin to net out at zero change to the pitch.
David Love
www.davidlovepianos.com
(sent from bb)

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Spalding <mike.spalding1 at frontier.com>
Sender: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2011 11:58:28 
To: <pianotech at ptg.org>
Reply-To: pianotech at ptg.org
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Hammer Technique: was Q & A Roundtable

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.
Quite right, I did misquote you.  I apologize.  So let me restate my 
question.  You can demonstrate that the speaking length tension doesn't 
exceed it's final tension by listening to its pitch as it rises just to 
the target pitch.  How do you know what the tension in the first segment 
is doing?  Since you're increasing the speaking length tension by 
pulling the string across a v-bar and counterbearing, deductive 
reasoning would tell us that the tension in the first segment is equal 
to the speaking length tension PLUS the friction at the v-bar and 
counterbearing.  Either the friction is zero, or the first segment 
tension is greater than the speaking length tension during a pitch increase.

I've no doubt that you have found a technique which allows you to tune 
fast, accurate, and stable.  And I applaud your willingness to share and 
teach. I'm only nit-picking because when your explanation appears to 
contradict the laws of physics, we're not getting an accurate picture of 
what your technique actually is.

Mike