[CAUT] McMorrow : was Hardness of termination...

[RicB]

Hi Ted

I think especially his Light weight hammer ideas were very
controversial.  He gets a very nice sound to be sure... but its not what
I would call a <<big>> sound. His justification went along the lines
that by decreasing mass one could increase velocity (of the hammer) and
the amount of force hitting the string would be the same.

I've not banged my head to much against that wall, but something about
all this has always seemed to me a bit off.  If for no other reason then
one clearly hears a very different piano when heavy vs light hammers are
compared on the same instrument. We've seen several discussions along
the lines of hammer inertia, force, rebound time, and the like along
these lines through the years.  I dont think there has been anything
definitive on it tho... outside of what one can observe casually.

I'm not sure what else there was to be very controversial about in his
book... except this bit on capos.  The rest of it was rather straight
forward sound action regulation and rebuilding material if I remember
correctly.  My copy has been tucked away for quite some time now.

Cheers
RicB


    I think Fred has it right. In fact I did dress the capo bars to a V as
    described by Ric, so we are probably not that far apart. I will try to
    obtain Ed McMurrow's book; actually I read it many years ago but cannot
    recall specific details. It is not in the Schaff catalogue, and
    deserves to
    be at least as much as many of the titles there. I do remember that
    some of
    his ideas were controversial and perhaps unproven. Innovation is not
    necessarily synomynous with substance, but should certainly be
    encouraged
    anyway, as the innovator is more likely to produce some enduring work.

    Ted Sambell
    -