[pianotech] Force equivalents in different actions

[PAULREVENKOJONES at aol.com]

In a message dated 3/24/2010 9:56:58 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
davidlovepianos at comcast.net writes:

Well,  you are correct, people still make mistakes with poor matching of 
hammer  weights and action ratios.  I meant that given the information, many 
seem  to be on the same page in terms of matching hammer weight to leverage.  
 Matching hammer weight (as opposed to, say, simple density) to scale and  
soundboard response is something I’m not seeing much consensus on or 
awareness  of, or so it seems. 
More than "seems", more's the  pity.


One consideration in all this, however, is that I  think it can be said 
that the leverage, which effects hammer speed, also  effects the tone. 
This is what Bob Hohf's work is all about. 

This can be demonstrated  (maybe David Stanwood will chime on the SALA).  
While little  consideration of this phenomenon is generally given, and 
understandably since  we don’t get side by side comparisons of this easily, and 
with a “new” action  the player simply “adjusts”, it does have an effect 
such that considerations  about hammer weight (or strike weight if you prefer) 
matching leverage for  tonal reasons as well as touchweight dynamics may be 
something to  consider.
Haven't those who think about this kind of thing  (soundboard design, 
flexibility, mass, etc, hammer/strike weight, AR's, etc.,  been doing this at 
least intuitively up until now, i.e. aiming at a tonal result  which is a 
matching of all of the considerations and more mentioned above? It  has been my 
experience, as sceptical (not simple dubioiusness for the sake of  it) as I 
am of much of the claims made for different methods, metrics, and  structural 
designs. 

Furthermore, let’s suppose  that one wanted to achieve the maximum power 
available in  a system for  whatever reason, you could argue that to achieve 
maximum power from the hammer  you should set up a system with high strike 
weights, high leverage and, of  course, you would then need assist springs in 
order to compensate for what  would otherwise be excessive key leading and 
high inertia.  Whether this  has any value in real world applications remains 
to be seen.     Just some thoughts. 
Substitute the word maximum "control" for "power"  and it grabs both ends 
of the spectrum and obviates solutions that bend toward  higher everything. 
 
Also, just a thought.
 
P


 
David Love 
www.davidlovepianos.com
 
 
From:  pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On 
Behalf Of  PAULREVENKOJONES at aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 7:31  PM
To: pianotech at ptg.org
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Force  equivalents in different actions

 

 

 
In a  message dated 3/24/2010 9:19:06 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
davidlovepianos at comcast.net writes:

I
assume  there is a consensus when it comes to weight considerations in terms
of  touch dynamics.  
 
David:
 

 
While  I wholeheartedly concur with the direction of your argument, I would 
urge  caution in assuming a consensus regarding weight considerations and 
the  possible remedies. I assume the opposite, that there are too few who are 
 paying proper attention to it. Add, then, the tonal results, and the  
sample gets sparser. 
 

 
Bob  Hohf has done a great amount of experimentation in this area with 
rather  dramatic results, not so much on the hammer weight side of things as on 
the  inertial and leverage side. But the implications would be easy to 
ferret out,  I suspect. 
 

 
Paul

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech.php/attachments/20100324/1929974e/attachment-0001.htm>