Doug Richards wrote: > Ron, > Very well put. I think we are talking the same language. The only > difference I have is my dislike for the word "impedance". In my line of > work, the only people that talk of impedance is them electrical guys (you > know, the ones that need scopes to see what they are doing). I am much more > comfortable talking about mode shapes, resonant frequencies, dynamic > coupling and the like and leave the impedance to the EE's. > > The reason I replied to your thread in the first place is reflecting on > previous threads about Killer Octaves. Seems like there should be someone > that optimized the impedance so that the Killer Octaves died. Maybe we > haven't figured out the best way to kill it yet... (or more likely, another > manufacturing problem or reliability issue comes up again). > > Anyway, thanks for the reply. And YES, we are having fun! > doug --------------------------------------------------------------- Ah, but Doug, the idea of mechanical impedance, or wave impedance, is very important if one is to understand the function of a vibrating body such as the piano soundboard. It is a function of the square root of the inertia times the springiness of the vibrating system. For a simple and piano specific explanation of mechanical impedance, might I suggest the chapter on Sound Production in Pianos in Arthur H Benade's book, "Fundamentals of Musical Acoustics." Regards, Del
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC