Bill Ballard wrote: > > > > It's similar to RicB's question about where the driven lever arm of > the hammershank should be located: down the shank's center line, > elevated to such a degree as to pass through the hammer heard's > center of gravity, or at the hammer's strike point. The payload is > the hammer's strike point, that's where linear measurements should be > taken. > The only problem here Bill, is that it doesn't work out right. I have done this time and time again and every time I do it the results are the same. Alan Vincent's formula coincides with Stanwood's very closely, and the method you refer to does not, and in fact causes an obvious difference between the resulting bass and treble ratio number that does not correspond to a real difference in ratio otherwise. This lack of a real difference can be confirmed by both the Stanwood measurement, and an actual measurement of the distance the hammer moves for any given key movement. This leads me to deem that Vincent's method is the correct one. The ratio is not about payloads. Its about how much movement happens at one end of the system for a given amount of movement at the other, or how much weight, or how much speed. I think, the problem with the method you point out is that the hammer isn't lifting anything, at least until it hits the string. Therefore the ratio taken thus corresponds to no real lever. By contrast... the hammer is the thing being lifted, and the lever lifting it is the shank with the knuckle at the fulcrum. In any case, the method Vincent gives yields the same results that Stanwood's formula gives. Any differences between the two have to do with inaccuracies in the measuring process. -- Richard Brekne RPT, N.P.T.F. UiB, Bergen, Norway mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no http://home.broadpark.no/~rbrekne/ricmain.html
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC