soft, bass trill regulation

[Richard Moody]

To reply to below, I have never been able to play a note on a grand piano
without it going into check. Which is why the statement " For
> >fastest repetition, the hammer must travel from the
> >string to the point where the jack stops it and back
> >to the string as quickly as possible."

 /This doesn't make much sense to me.  Actually it should be the rep lever
not the jack that stops the hammer unless the catch does.  But the back
check always catches the hammer because the momentum of the hammer over
powers the rep lever so it ends engaged with the back check no matter how
soft you play unless you don't want to be heard. 
	 So the question now is how can you get a better trill with a hammer
coming out of the back check.  Logically that would be at highest check. So
you pull the back check in.  But then from rest when the hammer rises on a
sharp blow, and it whisks ever so slightly against the b check and you
"loose power" you scratch your head until someone points it out to you and
if you are super lucky shows you how to correct it.  The corrections range
from pushing out the checks a little and living with a low check to
scientifically balancing a bunch of numbers including bc height and angle
both from key stick and of head, arc of hammer tail roughness of hammer
tail, dimensions of hammer tail taper and on and on plus a few more I would
be lucky to find out.  Then depending on how good you can trill (or fake it)
you know if the problem is solved or not. 

---ric                   www.pnotec.com

		    
	"The realization of ignorance is the first act of knowing." 
            Jean Toomer (1894 - 1967); US author, poet.




0	     

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pianotech-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org] On
> Behalf Of William Ballard
> Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2005 11:02 PM
> To: Pianotech
> Subject: Re: soft, bass trill regulation
> 
> At 8:13 PM -0700 8/30/05, Greg Graham wrote:
> >For minimum volume, the hammer must travel with
> >minimum velocity when it strikes the string.  For
> >fastest repetition, the hammer must travel from the
> >string to the point where the jack stops it and back
> >to the string as quickly as possible.  To satisfy both
> >minimum volume and maximum repetition, the distance
> >the hammer travels must be minimized, certainly much
> >less than full blow distance.  Half blow?  Less than
> >checking distance?  Obviously, the "trill blow
> >distance" must be more than let-off, or the jack would
> >never touch the knuckle.
> 
> You have a clear grasp of special complexities of this situation.
> Yes, the  hammer's speed cannot be the thing which is adjusted to
> reduce volume. It has to be be amount of the key stroke used to
> executes the repeated notes. And execution with a reduced keystroke
> always puts the pianist's control at greater risk.
> 
> >The jack should be waiting just under the knuckle at
> >this much-reduced blow distance, which leads me to
> >conclude that the key should be one-half, two-thirds,
> >or even more through its travel when the hammer
> >reaches this shallow "bottom".  Does that sound right?
> 
> There is still the issue of whether this is being done at the top of
> the stroke or the bottom, two entirely different ways of delivering a
> hammer to a string. Your description seems to imply the bottom of the
> stroke.
> 
> >Normally we set drop so that the hammer does not rise
> >above the let-off point at full key dip, but rather
> >ends up close to let-off.  What if we set drop a
> >little lower, so the jack had something to push
> >against in a very shallow trill, with the performer
> >lowering the wippen enough to get the jack under the
> >knuckle, but not enough to disengage the rep lever
> >from the drop screw?  A sensitive performer should be
> >able to feel that point of simultaneous
> >let-off/drop-screw engagement and stay there, no?
> >Actually, I suppose lowering the drop screw would
> >slightly separate the ideally simultaneous contact.
> 
> IOW, using an extended (but only slightly, subtly) contact with rep
> lever pressure as a cue to the pianist, as to how far from escapement
> he is getting in he brief return stroke.
> 
> >If, in the bass, let-off was 1/8th, and drop another
> >1/8th, with 1/16th rise during aftertouch, Would a
> >3/16th inch "trill blow distance" be possible and
> >repeatable?
> 
> Those dimension are much fatter than normally occur in a performance
> piano, but the idea is still interesting.
> 
> At 9:09 AM -0500 8/30/05, Barbara Richmond wrote:
> >Here is a link to Fleisher's most recent recording (Two Hands) that
> includes
> >the Schubert, though on Amazon, the example (Molto moderato) is listed
> being
> >by Bach (tsk, tsk):
> >http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-
> /B0002IQHHK/qid=1125409133/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl15/002-4695477-
> 0578431?v=glance&s=classical&n=507846#product-details
> 
> I just listened to this, and his trill is not that different from
> what I heard. Just in case (and to support Leon Fleisher as an
> artist), I've ordered a copy so as to hear this trill in CD-quality.
> (And I bet I can convince my accountant that this is a business
> expense.)
> 
> Mr. Bill
> 
> "Can you check out this middle C?. It "whangs' - (or twangs?)
>      Thanks so much, Ginger"
>      ...........Service Request
> +++++++++++++++++++++
> _______________________________________________
> pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives