>I dont see that Conklins statement says anything about whether or not the >waves are impeded in any sense by termination points, but he does say >directly that their frequencies are goverened by the speaking lengths. >Seems interesting to me that the speaking length then could possibly be >determinant in its effect on the strings longitudinal frequency, while >haveing no effect (or almost none perhaps) on the movement of these waves >beyond the borders of the speaking length. I'd put it considerably more in the category of unlikely than interesting. >This would jive tho, with the statement made by one of you all about the >excitement of a longitudinal wave in one of the duplex lengths being able >to only excite its own fundemental and partials in the speaking length. Which is a point based on what I consider to be that unlikely premise. >I am unconvinced that plucking the string in the example Ron gives is >neccessarilly the same as exciting the longitudinal mode, which would >perhaps explain why he doesnt get the same results from both front and >back duplex modes. I am not sure that this "plucking" experiment of the >front duplex has anything at all to do with longitudinal waves. In any >case most of what I have found about exciting longitudinal frequencies in >strings has to do with rubbing them... sort of like how one gets the ring >from a crystal glass to sound. This would mean that the plucking >phenomena then is explained by something else. Which is, of course, my point. And I've already described what that something else would be. >I poked around the nett last nite looking for something directly relative >to this but couldnt find much. >-- >Richard Brekne No kidding? Ron N
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC