tapping strings

[David Skolnik]

At 05:05 PM 04/06/2002 +0200, you, RicB, wrote:


>That said there are many who insist that the string must terminate exactly 
>at the same spot on the bridge pin as on the bridge itself.

What percentage of energy is carried by pin, as opposed to wood of 
bridge?  Do they process different vibrational modes?  What is the effect 
of nonsynchronos terminations (wood before pin/ pin before wood)?  What 
other theories are currently active?

>It has been stated that a convex surface, though it would tend to even the 
>pressure
>relationships between the bridge surface and strings, would result in a 
>loss of
>energy.

Ric -can you supply a source of this theory?  Why would energy loss occur?

>But then if the flat surface so easily deteriorates as also claimed, (and 
>in a fashion resembling to the convex shape mind you) then perhaps to 
>start with a convex shape might be more useful then presently assumed 
>after all.

I would say in more than just "a fashion"  But in any case, can you explain 
to me how you would measure downbearing on a convex bridge surface?


>Richard West wrote on Sat, 06 Apr 2002
>
> > Secondly when a piano is restrung common practice nowadays to to get 
> rid of the
> > indentations, and refresh the notching.

Why?  Why take out the indentations?

>  I've often wondered what this is doing to
> > downbearing.  To me the depth of the bridge indentation might be a 
> measure of the
> > extremes of humidity that the piano has been subjected to.

Is this to imply that without significant climactic fluctuations there 
would be no indentations?


>RicB again:
>I have played with the thought of trying to find some way of filling 
>indentations
>because of this same worry.

What would you fill them with that wouldn't re compress, or disintegrate? 
If there is such a material, why not use it for the original cap. as 
Richard West mentioned?


David Skolnik