Evidence of overlacquered hammers

[Bernhard Stopper]

David wrote:

>A panel which
>moves less efficiently will require more mass, density or both from the
>hammer in order to achieve the same displacement of air by its motion
>than a panel that moves more efficiently for which a softer hammer will
>achieve the same result.

No i don´t agree, because there is the string between the soundboard and the
hammer. If the string is too thin, more mass in the hammer has no
possibility to arrive at the soundboard.

Bernhard


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Love" <davidlovepianos@comcast.net>
To: "'Pianotech'" <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Saturday, October 02, 2004 2:40 AM
Subject: RE: Evidence of overlacquered hammers


> My understanding is that the soundboard is a transducer, not an
> amplifier--there is no added energy--it's function is to convert energy
> of the vibrating string into a larger moving body which has the ability
> to move the air which the string by itself does not possess in
> sufficient quantity.  The panel's ability to do that is a function of
> several factors including:  panel thickness, rib dimensions and
> stiffness, crown, spring rate, type of rim, location of bridges and
> probably other things which I have forgotten.  Not all soundboards will
> move with the same efficiency and some will move too much--or some areas
> of the panel will.  The hammer imparts a blow to the strings and the
> energy imparted is a function of hardness, mass or both.  A panel which
> moves less efficiently will require more mass, density or both from the
> hammer in order to achieve the same displacement of air by its motion
> than a panel that moves more efficiently for which a softer hammer will
> achieve the same result.  How the partials develop is a somewhat
> different issue, which I am not addressing here.
>
> So, if not all panels are created equal, then one hammer will not yield
> the same result on different panels.  How much different the panels need
> to be to be able to hear that is another issue.
>
> David Love
> davidlovepianos@comcast.net
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pianotech-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org] On
> Behalf Of antares
> Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 12:52 PM
> To: Pianotech
> Subject: Re: Evidence of overlacquered hammers
>
>
> On 1-okt-04, at 21:41, Bernhard Stopper wrote:
>
> > The time, the hammer is in contact with the string is the main effect
> > of how
> > many partials and in what weight they will occur. The soundboard
> > itself has absolutely no possibiliy to add any partials to the strings
> > spectrum (except the short shock spectrum caused by the hammer impact)
>
> > and
> > acts only as an amplifier and filter. But the oscillator is the
> string.
> >
> > best regards
> >
> > Bernhard Stopper
> >
>
> Exactly. Thank you for your clear explanation Bernhard!
>
> André Oorebeek
>
> _______________________________________________
> pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives