<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; =
charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1264" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>At the risk of asking a question that has =
been asked
a zillion times before......</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Is there perhaps a fundamental difference in the =
way a
piano soundboard vibrates compared to whatever on a violin vibrates from =
string
movement to produce their respective sounds? Is the piano soundboard =
moving more
like a speaker cone (I realize most soundboards are pretty far =
from that
ideal) compared to the vibrating front of the violin? I ask that =
because
if piano soundboard movement is closer to the speaker cone, we are =
strictly
looking at a vibrating diaphragm, and the ability of the soundboard =
material to
"transmit sound" is a mute point (pun intended). To the best of my =
knowledge,
speaker cones do not "transmit sound", but rather move as a single =
unit at
whatever frequency(s) is required to produce intended sound - paper =
cones work
well, but carbon-fiber or a number of other exotic materials with =
greater
stiffness-to-weight ratios than paper work better - but not because the =
exotic
cone material "transmits sound" any better, but rather because the =
material
moves more efficiently as it is driven by the speaker voice coil - or in =
the
case of the piano, the string.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>So my question is - is the speaker cone =
analogy more
closely related to the case with the piano soundboard and less so =
with the
violin? No relationship? </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Again, if fear this has been asked before - and =
if I've
read info on it, I guess that means I just haven't thoroughly understood =
it.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>And here's a question that <EM>may</EM> not have =
been
asked before (and maybe for good reason): "As wood gets older,.....and =
displays
lower EMC levels." Does it? Or does it simply become slightly less dense =
from
losing volatile components, and then simply carries less water in it at =
the
<EM>same</EM> EMC?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Terry Farrell</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>----- Original Message ----- </FONT>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>From: "Richard Brekne" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:Richard.Brekne@grieg.uib.no"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>Richard.Brekne@grieg.uib.no</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial
size=2>></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>To: "Pianotech" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>pianotech@ptg.org</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial =
size=2>></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 3:22 =
AM</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Subject: Re: interesting wood
article</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><BR><FONT size=2></FONT></FONT></DIV><FONT =
face=Arial
size=2>> <BR>> Another interesting point seems to be that aged =
wood having
possible positive<BR>> benifits in music instrument making perhaps is =
not so
unreasonable a proposition<BR>> after all. As wood gets older,
according to proponents of this school, it<BR>> becomes stiffer, =
lighter,
looses some of its hygrophility (ie becomes<BR>> significantly more =
stable in
the face of changes in humidity), and displays<BR>> lower EMC levels. =
One of
the down sides is that it becomes more brittle.<BR>> Evidently the =
velocity
of sound through wood increases with these changes... ie<BR>> aged =
wood will
conduct sound at greater speeds then new wood. These seem to =
be<BR>>
the same kinds of characteristic changes embraced by a few companies =
around
the<BR>> world using new technology thermo treated wood in music =
instruments.
They are<BR>> able to register increased sustain qualities in =
instruments
when compared to<BR>> controll instruments made of untreated woods... =
or so
they say.<BR>> <BR>> Who knows... :)<BR>> <BR>> =
Cheers<BR>>
RicB<BR>> --<BR>> Richard Brekne<BR>> RPT, N.P.T.F.<BR>> =
UiB,
Bergen, Norway<BR>> </FONT><A =
href="mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no"><FONT
face=Arial size=2>mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no</FONT></A><BR><FONT =
face=Arial
size=2>> </FONT><A
href="http://home.broadpark.no/~rbrekne/ricmain.html"><FONT =
face=Arial
size=2>http://home.broadpark.no/~rbrekne/ricmain.html</FONT></A><BR><FO=
NT
face=Arial size=2>> </FONT><A
href="http://www.hf.uib.no/grieg/personer/cv_RB.html"><FONT =
face=Arial
size=2>http://www.hf.uib.no/grieg/personer/cv_RB.html</FONT></A><BR><FO=
NT
face=Arial size=2>> <BR>> <BR>>
_______________________________________________<BR>> pianotech list =
info:
</FONT><A href="https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives"><FONT =
face=Arial
size=2>https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives</FONT></A><BR><FON=
T
face=Arial size=2>> </FONT></BODY></HTML>