Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums
Over 2 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers (it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

SEARCH
the Forums & Piano World

This custom search works much better than the built in one and allows searching older posts.
(ad 125) Sweetwater - Digital Keyboards & Other Gear
Digital Pianos at Sweetwater
(ad) Pearl River
Pearl River Pianos
(ad) Pianoteq
Latest Pianoteq add-on instrument: U4 upright piano
(ad) P B Guide
Acoustic & Digital Piano Guide
PianoSupplies.com (150)
Piano Accessories Music Related Gifts Piano Tuning Equipment Piano Moving Equipment
We now offer Gift Certificates in our online store!
(ad) Estonia Piano
Estonia Piano
Quick Links to Useful Stuff
Our Classified Ads
Find Piano Professionals-

*Piano Dealers - Piano Stores
*Piano Tuners
*Piano Teachers
*Piano Movers
*Piano Restorations
*Piano Manufacturers
*Organs

Quick Links:
*Advertise On Piano World
*Free Piano Newsletter
*Online Piano Recitals
*Piano Recitals Index
*Piano Accessories
* Buying a Piano
*Buying A Acoustic Piano
*Buying a Digital Piano
*Pianos for Sale
*Sell Your Piano
*How Old is My Piano?
*Piano Books
*Piano Art, Pictures, & Posters
*Directory/Site Map
*Contest
*Links
*Virtual Piano
*Music Word Search
*Piano Screen Saver
*Piano Videos
*Virtual Piano Chords
Topic Options
#2039834 - 02/26/13 08:04 PM Theory of hammer blow distance...
johnlewisgrant Online   content
Full Member

Registered: 11/17/07
Posts: 470
Loc: canada
Seem to be quite a few opinions on the issue. And obviously the impact of the distance between the hammer at rest and the lower face of the strings has a major impact on both the tone and the feel of the piano.

Are there any agreed on rules of thumb for the "ideal" or "preferred" distance for the modern grand? Is 4.5 to 4.7mm or, say, 1 3/4- 1 7/8 a good starting point? Does the bass deserve a little more distance than the treble? Or should everything be kept the same? Does more always translate into louder?

Top
(ad PTG 568) Win a Year Journal Subscription
PTG 57th Annual Convention - Atlanta
#2039881 - 02/26/13 09:36 PM Re: Theory of hammer blow distance... [Re: johnlewisgrant]
Mark Cerisano, RPT Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 01/24/10
Posts: 1065
Loc: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
My humble opinion and experience is that it doesn't matter much.
Upright soft pedals move hammers closer to strings with little or no loss in power.
Keydip and let off are much more sensitive.
When looking to rob from elements of the regulation triangle, blow distance is always the first to go because the tone and response doesn't change much for even a decrease of 10mm IMHO and experience.
There are so many more elements that contribute to power. The elasticity of the shank, for example.
_________________________
Mark Cerisano, RPT
www.howtotunepianos.com

Top
#2039946 - 02/27/13 01:33 AM Re: Theory of hammer blow distance... [Re: johnlewisgrant]
Del Offline
5000 Post Club Member

Registered: 09/04/03
Posts: 5174
Loc: Olympia, Washington
Originally Posted By: johnlewisgrant
Seem to be quite a few opinions on the issue. And obviously the impact of the distance between the hammer at rest and the lower face of the strings has a major impact on both the tone and the feel of the piano.

Are there any agreed on rules of thumb for the "ideal" or "preferred" distance for the modern grand? Is 4.5 to 4.7mm or, say, 1 3/4- 1 7/8 a good starting point? Does the bass deserve a little more distance than the treble? Or should everything be kept the same? Does more always translate into louder?

I’m not sure there is any particular “theory” about hammer blow distance.

The starting point is usually set by the physical parameters of the piano. In what we call the “modern” piano the distance from the bottom of the pinblock to the string plane it typically around 38 to 40 mm. Sometimes a little less or more. It’s about 6 to 8 mm from the top of the dropscrew down to the hammershank center. Plus there needs to be a little clearance between the bottom of the pinblock and the top of dropscrew. And, usually, we don’t want the hammer to rub against the bottom of the pinblock when the action is removed from, or replaced in, the action cavity.

Add this all up—and assuming you don’t want the hammershank to over-center at hammer impact—and you come up with a hammer blow of somewhere around 45 mm. Some pianos have a hammer blow specification of 48 mm but this is usually because there is more distance between the bottom of the pinblock and the string plane.

ddf
_________________________
Delwin D Fandrich
Piano Research, Design & Manufacturing Consultant
ddfandrich@gmail.com
(To contact me privately please use this e-mail address.)

Stupidity is a rare condition, ignorance is a common choice. --Anon

Top
#2039951 - 02/27/13 02:03 AM Re: Theory of hammer blow distance... [Re: johnlewisgrant]
BDB Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member

Registered: 06/07/03
Posts: 21285
Loc: Oakland
An old Erard grand that I worked on must have had a blow distance of about 60-70 mm. So it has gotten considerably smaller since then.
_________________________
Semipro Tech

Top
#2040032 - 02/27/13 08:47 AM Re: Theory of hammer blow distance... [Re: johnlewisgrant]
johnlewisgrant Online   content
Full Member

Registered: 11/17/07
Posts: 470
Loc: canada
Yes "theory" is a fancy word for "approaches to".

Anyhow, to put the discussion into some kind of context: I asked Hailun for specs on the 218. The "official" hammer blow distance for the 218 is "4.7mm" but "4.5mm" for a new piano (a little less than 1 3/4") but I quickly realized that these numbers were pretty theoretical.

For one thing, the strings of the middle section of the 218 (a3 to f#4) are NOT level, but actually slant down towards a3 from f#4! So a uniform hammer distance would have required the hammers in this range ALSO to slant down, which they did not. So the hammer drop in effect DECREASED towards the A3, by about 1-2mm (I haven't measured it exactly), by virtue of the fact that the hammers themselves were level. (That setting didn't make a lot of sense to me. One would think that the hammer drop should remain more or less constant in the trichords... Go figure.)

My new piano "out of the box" measured something like 4.4mm for the trichords and 4.6mm for the wound strings. After playing with the let-off, which to my taste, dramatically improved the feel of an already very nice instrument (I decreased it to the min I could get away with without bobbling), I noticed in passing that the hammer drop seemed a little shallow (small) for my taste (4.4mm in the trichord region; 4.6m in the bass).

I tried various different (increased) settings and found that 4.6 was a better sounding ballpark for me on the trichords, especially once I had decreased the let-off: I got a better tone and more dynamic range (without any doubt) in the trichords. The wound strings I set closer to 4.6-4.7mm.

So it seems to me anecdotally, that increasing the hammer distance has a huge impact on both tone and loudness. 4.7 was too loud and not enough control in the treb (trichords) 4.4 on the other hand was not enought "hit" or potential power, for want of a better word, when needed.

But you can't leave the let-off out of the equation.

The tight let-off seems to be important in the overall equation, since once the hammer blow distance is INCREASED (closer to "factory specs"), the let-off makes pp and quick repetition still easy to achieve. If I were merely to increase the blow distance, absent refining the let-off, it seems to me that pp and fast repetition might become much more difficult.

44mm (under 1 3/4") just seems a little too short a distance for hammer blow distance, at least in this case. Can I take that as a safe generalization about hammer blow distance, I wonder? Are there large grands out there that are routinely set at 4.4mm blow distance for the trichords? Are there professional pianists who insist on that kind of setting?

I ask because I'd be willing to experiment with the 4.4mm "limit" in the trichords if I thought it were something techs routinely did. Something tells me that it isn't.

Top
#2040068 - 02/27/13 10:05 AM Re: Theory of hammer blow distance... [Re: johnlewisgrant]
David Jenson Online   content
2000 Post Club Member

Registered: 10/22/06
Posts: 2038
Loc: Maine
"The starting point is usually set by the physical parameters of the piano." Del

That's the key phrase! In setting up an action for regulation, I look at everything even including how much of the drop screw I want showing above the hammer flange. As I think about it, the amount of blow is about the last thing I pay any attention to except as to how it affects let-off, drop and aftertouch.

I suspect that reliable repetition, even checking, and durability of the regulation are more important than hammer blow esoterica to most of us.
_________________________
David L. Jenson
Tuning - Repairs - Refurbishing
Jenson's Piano Service
-----

Top
#2040076 - 02/27/13 10:23 AM Re: Theory of hammer blow distance... [Re: johnlewisgrant]
Mark Cerisano, RPT Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 01/24/10
Posts: 1065
Loc: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Did you read my threads on the regulation triangle?

You are leaving a lot out of the equation.

For me, aftertouch needs to be appropriate and uniform, for great feel and expression. This is the key to proper regulation, IMHO. Also, keeping aftertouch as an ideal in your mind, allows you to more easily grasp the theory of how all the other elements relate to each other. (Only one other poster in this forum claims aftertouch is unnecessary for proper mechanical execution, but we are talking about feel here. Most technicians I know agree and agonize over aftertouch.)

Jack knuckle alignment must be uniform or all other specs will need to be uneven to some degree to achieve uniform aftertouch.

Keydip will affect all other elements of the triangle.

So, when you are monkeying around with hammer blow, of course you are setting the whole mechanism out of whack and you will get inefficient energy transfer which results in huge variations in tone.

In my course, I am very succinct in how I describe the way the action works and how to decide what to adjust.

In simplistic terms, you must have appropriate aftertouch for any combination of Blow/Dip/Letoff. Changing any one of these will affect aftertouch and requires that you adjust one of the other two to preserve aftertouch, assuming it was good before.

Finally, any technician will tell you that proper regulation and proper relation of the triangle elements has a dramatic affect on tone. After I do a regulation, I am always impressed by how much the tone has improved as well as the uniformness of the response.

I hope you have a better understanding now of the larger picture; if you want to get into the action and start changing settings, you understand now that you are incorrect if you make assumptions about the ideal settings for this or that without understanding how all the elements work together. I say this from experience; I have relearnt much more than I know due to my own incorrect assumptions. This is a humbling skill; individual knowledgeable technicians have a long history of broken assumptions IMHO, I know I do.

As simple as your understanding of regulation was entering into this thread, that is my understanding relative to many other concepts I catch a glimpse of now and then. Like shank stiffness, balance hole friction, downbearing, downweight, upweight, action geometry, etc. Understanding how all these elements and more relate is necessary, the more precise one wishes to regulate.

Good luck with your project. Use and understand the elements I, and others are presenting and you will have much greater success.

Do not dismiss the comments of other experienced technicians. For example, when Del Fandrich refuses to pin down an exact theory on hammer blow, and describes vague limitations like the height of the pinblock and nothing directly related to tone, you should have a pretty good idea that it is not as critical as you think it is, unless of course you don't know who he is.

I hope you do not find any impoliteness in the tone of my email. Truly, I am very excited about the thought of someone with a beginning understanding of regulation, suddenly grasping the weight of certain ideas and experiencing the effect of specific and understood adjustments on an action for themselves. I wish I could be there.

All the best.
_________________________
Mark Cerisano, RPT
www.howtotunepianos.com

Top
#2040167 - 02/27/13 01:38 PM Re: Theory of hammer blow distance... [Re: Mark Cerisano, RPT]
beethoven986 Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 01/20/09
Posts: 3320
Originally Posted By: Mark Cerisano, RPT

For me, aftertouch needs to be appropriate and uniform, for great feel and expression. This is the key to proper regulation, IMHO. Also, keeping aftertouch as an ideal in your mind, allows you to more easily grasp the theory of how all the other elements relate to each other. (Only one other poster in this forum claims aftertouch is unnecessary for proper mechanical execution, but we are talking about feel here. Most technicians I know agree and agonize over aftertouch.).... In simplistic terms, you must have appropriate aftertouch for any combination of Blow/Dip/Letoff. Changing any one of these will affect aftertouch and requires that you adjust one of the other two to preserve aftertouch, assuming it was good before.


Absolutely 100% agree. Too little or too much and/or uneven aftertouch is annoying not only for techs, but also for pianists, even if they don't know it.
_________________________
B.Mus. Piano Performance 2009
M.Mus. Piano Performance & Literature 2011
PTG Associate Member
Certified Dampp-Chaser installer

Top
#2040170 - 02/27/13 01:44 PM Re: Theory of hammer blow distance... [Re: johnlewisgrant]
Supply Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 09/11/06
Posts: 3919
Loc: Vancouver Island, BC, Canada
Quote:
I noticed in passing that the hammer drop seemed a little shallow (small) for my taste (4.4mm in the trichord region; 4.6m in the bass).
I am not sure how anyone can measure tenths of a mm in drop. In any case, these measurements are close to twice what the drop should be in a properly regulated piano.

I suggest you bring in a technician to go over the regulation details.
_________________________
Jurgen Goering
Piano Forte Supply
www.pianofortesupply.com

Piattino Caster Cups distributor

Top
#2040198 - 02/27/13 02:28 PM Re: Theory of hammer blow distance... [Re: johnlewisgrant]
Withindale Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 02/09/11
Posts: 1921
Loc: Suffolk, England
"Is 4.5 to 4.7mm or, say, 1 3/4- 1 7/8 a good starting point?"

"I noticed in passing that the hammer drop seemed a little shallow (small) for my taste (4.4mm in the trichord region; 4.6m in the bass)."

Are the units here cm or mm, which measurements refer to blow and which to drop?
_________________________
Ian Russell
Schiedmayer & Soehne, 1925 Model 14, 55" upright
Ibach, 1922 49" upright (project piano)

Top
#2040278 - 02/27/13 04:18 PM Re: Theory of hammer blow distance... [Re: Withindale]
beethoven986 Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 01/20/09
Posts: 3320
Originally Posted By: Withindale
"Is 4.5 to 4.7mm or, say, 1 3/4- 1 7/8 a good starting point?"

"I noticed in passing that the hammer drop seemed a little shallow (small) for my taste (4.4mm in the trichord region; 4.6m in the bass)."

Are the units here cm or mm, which measurements refer to blow and which to drop?


For blow, it would be 4.5cm or 45mm. 4.5mm would be impossible, of course. Drop should be 1mm, maybe 2mm at most. I always set to 1mm. Anything more than 2mm is just... wrong.
_________________________
B.Mus. Piano Performance 2009
M.Mus. Piano Performance & Literature 2011
PTG Associate Member
Certified Dampp-Chaser installer

Top
#2040295 - 02/27/13 04:58 PM Re: Theory of hammer blow distance... [Re: beethoven986]
Withindale Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 02/09/11
Posts: 1921
Loc: Suffolk, England
Originally Posted By: beethoven986
Drop should be 1mm, maybe 2mm at most. I always set to 1mm. Anything more than 2mm is just... wrong.

Do you measure drop from the string or from the let off point? Reblitz suggests let off of 1.5mm plus drop of 1.5mm making a total drop height of 3mm (1/8") below the string.
_________________________
Ian Russell
Schiedmayer & Soehne, 1925 Model 14, 55" upright
Ibach, 1922 49" upright (project piano)

Top
#2040302 - 02/27/13 05:05 PM Re: Theory of hammer blow distance... [Re: Withindale]
beethoven986 Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 01/20/09
Posts: 3320
Originally Posted By: Withindale
Originally Posted By: beethoven986
Drop should be 1mm, maybe 2mm at most. I always set to 1mm. Anything more than 2mm is just... wrong.

Do you measure drop from the string or from the let off point?


From let off.
_________________________
B.Mus. Piano Performance 2009
M.Mus. Piano Performance & Literature 2011
PTG Associate Member
Certified Dampp-Chaser installer

Top
#2040310 - 02/27/13 05:16 PM Re: Theory of hammer blow distance... [Re: beethoven986]
Withindale Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 02/09/11
Posts: 1921
Loc: Suffolk, England
Originally Posted By: beethoven986
Originally Posted By: Withindale
Originally Posted By: beethoven986
Drop should be 1mm, maybe 2mm at most. I always set to 1mm. Anything more than 2mm is just... wrong.

Do you measure drop from the string or from the let off point?

From let off.

Now set aftertouch and you're done?
_________________________
Ian Russell
Schiedmayer & Soehne, 1925 Model 14, 55" upright
Ibach, 1922 49" upright (project piano)

Top
#2040325 - 02/27/13 05:54 PM Re: Theory of hammer blow distance... [Re: johnlewisgrant]
Gene Nelson Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 09/10/04
Posts: 1464
Loc: Old Hangtown California
Then there are those wonderful pianos where the string height decreases in a shallow arc across the capo section.
Some will regulate a straight hammer line and decrease key dip to compensate while others will maintain constant key dip and lower the hammer line to maintain blow distance.
_________________________
RPT
PTG Member

Top
#2040327 - 02/27/13 05:58 PM Re: Theory of hammer blow distance... [Re: Supply]
johnlewisgrant Online   content
Full Member

Registered: 11/17/07
Posts: 470
Loc: canada
Originally Posted By: Supply
Quote:
I noticed in passing that the hammer drop seemed a little shallow (small) for my taste (4.4mm in the trichord region; 4.6m in the bass).
I am not sure how anyone can measure tenths of a mm in drop. In any case, these measurements are close to twice what the drop should be in a properly regulated piano.

I suggest you bring in a technician to go over the regulation details.


Did I say "drop"!! I meant "blow distance"!! And not "mm" but of course "cm" (centimeters)!!

Sorry for the confusion.

Top
#2040328 - 02/27/13 06:00 PM Re: Theory of hammer blow distance... [Re: Withindale]
johnlewisgrant Online   content
Full Member

Registered: 11/17/07
Posts: 470
Loc: canada
Originally Posted By: Withindale
"Is 4.5 to 4.7mm or, say, 1 3/4- 1 7/8 a good starting point?"

"I noticed in passing that the hammer drop seemed a little shallow (small) for my taste (4.4mm in the trichord region; 4.6m in the bass)."

Are the units here cm or mm, which measurements refer to blow and which to drop?


Sorry. Centimeters!! (Not mm.) And I'm not talking about drop; I meant hammer blow distance! Typing faster than I ought to!!

Top
#2040332 - 02/27/13 06:15 PM Re: Theory of hammer blow distance... [Re: johnlewisgrant]
johnlewisgrant Online   content
Full Member

Registered: 11/17/07
Posts: 470
Loc: canada
Everything Mike says about the triangle nature of adjusting the hammer line makes perfect sense.

My question was really more about whether the Rebliztian suggestion that blow distance--for the modern concert grand--should sit ideally between 1 3/4" and 1 7/8" is still considered pretty accurate, these days. You hear reports of new grands having blow distances from the factory of 4.4 CM or less, which seems awful small!

Also, I suspect just from common sense, certainly not from any professional experience, that one would aim towards a greater blow distance (towards the 1 7/8) as long as let-off and after touch are preserved. Seems to me that one gets in this way both power and subtlety--if everything else is OK.

Now my piano is in a small room; so here's what I think might be an exception: if I push the blow distance to 1 7/8", this grand gets quite loud. Fine--great--in a concert hall; but not in a small room. So I'm playing with something in the range of 1 3/4".

A real discovery for me was the fact (as I said above) that the string height actually varies from section to section, and even within sections!! Sure, the wound strings will vary in thickness: that's obvious. But I had no idea that I couldn't just set the trichord hammer line smooth from top to bottom (although that's the way it came from the factory.)

Top
#2040345 - 02/27/13 06:49 PM Re: Theory of hammer blow distance... [Re: johnlewisgrant]
beethoven986 Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 01/20/09
Posts: 3320
44mm is fine for blow, depending on your other regulation specs. In fact, that is more or less my default, but, I also set my key dip somewhat more shallow than some, I suspect.
_________________________
B.Mus. Piano Performance 2009
M.Mus. Piano Performance & Literature 2011
PTG Associate Member
Certified Dampp-Chaser installer

Top
#2040371 - 02/27/13 08:28 PM Re: Theory of hammer blow distance... [Re: beethoven986]
johnlewisgrant Online   content
Full Member

Registered: 11/17/07
Posts: 470
Loc: canada
Originally Posted By: beethoven986
44mm is fine for blow, depending on your other regulation specs. In fact, that is more or less my default, but, I also set my key dip somewhat more shallow than some, I suspect.


Thanks... that's exactly the sort of info I'm looking for.

JG

Top
#2040396 - 02/27/13 09:26 PM Re: Theory of hammer blow distance... [Re: johnlewisgrant]
Del Offline
5000 Post Club Member

Registered: 09/04/03
Posts: 5174
Loc: Olympia, Washington
Originally Posted By: johnlewisgrant
My question was really more about whether the Rebliztian suggestion that blow distance--for the modern concert grand--should sit ideally between 1 3/4" and 1 7/8" is still considered pretty accurate, these days. You hear reports of new grands having blow distances from the factory of 4.4 CM or less, which seems awful small!

Many factories set blow distance some shallow knowing full well it is going to settle (increase) over time. There may also be some who specify a shorter blow distance for some mechanical or action ratio reason.

An example might be a piano with particularly heavy hammers that has been balanced with a relatively (numerically) low overall action ratio. By setting a slightly short blow distance they could still use a reasonable key stroke (i.e., not too deep) while still providing an adequate amount of key aftertouch.



Quote:
Also, I suspect just from common sense, certainly not from any professional experience, that one would aim towards a greater blow distance (towards the 1 7/8) as long as let-off and after touch are preserved. Seems to me that one gets in this way both power and subtlety--if everything else is OK.

Now my piano is in a small room; so here's what I think might be an exception: if I push the blow distance to 1 7/8", this grand gets quite loud. Fine--great--in a concert hall; but not in a small room. So I'm playing with something in the range of 1 3/4".

Generally small variations in hammer stroke—by themselves—do not have a great effect on the acoustical power produced by a piano. Assuming, of course, that the rest of the action parameters are regulated accordingly. If you really are hearing a significant variation in acoustical power—as opposed to a perceived difference—I’d be looking somewhere else to find out why.

Subtlety is achieved by making sure all of the various regulating parameters are precisely and correctly adjusted to balance with the chosen hammer blow distance.

There is nothing magical about this; it’s really just a matter of several different lever ratios working in synergy with each other. Unless you are prepared to modify the overall action ratio—Not advised unless something is screwed up in your action and you really, really know what you are doing!—then the appropriate hammer blow distance ends up being a compromise between the physical location of the hammer relative to the bottom of the pinblock and the rest rail (or cushions) at the back of the wippens and the desired amount of key travel and aftertouch.

In most pianos there is enough room to move the hammers a little closer to, or further away from the strings than is specified by the manufacturer. It is OK to experiment with this as long as you remember to compensate for the changes in hammer blow distance with suitable adjustments in key travel and aftertouch.

I suspect that if you fully re-regulate the action after changing the hammer blow distance you won’t find all that much difference in overall acoustical power. You will notice a change in how the action feels and this is often translated into a perception change in how the piano sounds.



Quote:
A real discovery for me was the fact (as I said above) that the string height actually varies from section to section, and even within sections!! Sure, the wound strings will vary in thickness: that's obvious. But I had no idea that I couldn't just set the trichord hammer line smooth from top to bottom (although that's the way it came from the factory.)

Yes, the string height, as measured from the keybed, can vary considerably from section-to-section as well as within a section. This is a function of how “flat” the casting patterns and molds are, how the string frame twists and warps as it cools and how it is machined and drilled. In theory modern string frames should be somewhat “flatter” than their predecessors because the machinery doing the cutting and drilling is now often NC (numerical) or CNC (computer/numerical) controlled. Many string frames are now cast with a little extra iron in critical areas and the milling/drilling machine simply hog their way through cutting off the excess and leaving the V-bars and agrafe drilling seats relatively flat. But, obviously, this is not always the case.

In terms of a piano’s performance a string frame would have to be wildly out of square before there would be any noticeable degradation of tone.

ddf
_________________________
Delwin D Fandrich
Piano Research, Design & Manufacturing Consultant
ddfandrich@gmail.com
(To contact me privately please use this e-mail address.)

Stupidity is a rare condition, ignorance is a common choice. --Anon

Top
#2040413 - 02/27/13 10:04 PM Re: Theory of hammer blow distance... [Re: johnlewisgrant]
Dave B Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/01/11
Posts: 1901
Loc: Philadelphia area
I'm surprised by Mark being the only one to mention key dip in relation to blow distance. Whenever I think through action mechanics, I try to keep in mind that the first act of mechanical movement is the arc of the fingers pushing on the key tops. I bring this up because of the relationship of the key dip to both the blow distance and the players hand.

Top
#2040419 - 02/27/13 10:12 PM Re: Theory of hammer blow distance... [Re: Dave B]
Del Offline
5000 Post Club Member

Registered: 09/04/03
Posts: 5174
Loc: Olympia, Washington
Originally Posted By: Dave B
I'm surprised by Mark being the only one to mention key dip in relation to blow distance. Whenever I think through action mechanics, I try to keep in mind that the first act of mechanical movement is the arc of the fingers pushing on the key tops. I bring this up because of the relationship of the key dip to both the blow distance and the players hand.

Key travel and key dip are the same thing. I prefer the term key travel as being more descriptive of what is actually happening; i.e., there is a direct relationship between hammer travel and key travel. Key aftertouch is a part of the overall key travel. (But you knew that....)

ddf
_________________________
Delwin D Fandrich
Piano Research, Design & Manufacturing Consultant
ddfandrich@gmail.com
(To contact me privately please use this e-mail address.)

Stupidity is a rare condition, ignorance is a common choice. --Anon

Top
#2040530 - 02/28/13 03:25 AM Re: Theory of hammer blow distance... [Re: Del]
Withindale Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 02/09/11
Posts: 1921
Loc: Suffolk, England
Originally Posted By: Del
Subtlety is achieved by making sure all of the various regulating parameters are precisely and correctly adjusted to balance with the chosen hammer blow distance.

Quote:
Subtlety is achieved by making sure all of the various regulating parameters are precisely and correctly adjusted to balance with the chosen key travel.

Are these statements equivalent in practice?


Edited by Withindale (02/28/13 05:27 AM)
Edit Reason: corrected typo "hammer key travel"
_________________________
Ian Russell
Schiedmayer & Soehne, 1925 Model 14, 55" upright
Ibach, 1922 49" upright (project piano)

Top
#2040535 - 02/28/13 03:52 AM Re: Theory of hammer blow distance... [Re: Withindale]
Del Offline
5000 Post Club Member

Registered: 09/04/03
Posts: 5174
Loc: Olympia, Washington
Originally Posted By: Withindale
Originally Posted By: Del
Subtlety is achieved by making sure all of the various regulating parameters are precisely and correctly adjusted to balance with the chosen hammer blow distance.

Quote:
Subtlety is achieved by making sure all of the various regulating parameters are precisely and correctly adjusted to balance with the chosen hammer key travel.

Are these statements equivalent in practice?

Interesting question. Let's see if I understand it correctly, I would say yes except that there are usually more constraints on hammer travel than there are on key travel. That is, the maximum height of the hammer at rest is limited by the bottom of the pinblock and its minimum height is limited by the wippen and/or the shank rest rail. (Yes, that is adjustable but only within its own limits.)

So, if one wanted a particularly shallow (i.e., short) key stroke it may not be possible to shorten up the hammer travel enough and there may not be adequate aftertouch. Or, if one wanted a particularly deep (or long) keystroke it may not be possible to increase the hammer travel enough to accommodate.

On the other hand, it is usually possible to set the hammer travel anywhere within the physical limitations of the piano and still come up with a key travel setting that will work; i.e., one that will drive the hammer through its desired stroke and still have adequate travel left over for an appropriate aftertouch.

ddf
_________________________
Delwin D Fandrich
Piano Research, Design & Manufacturing Consultant
ddfandrich@gmail.com
(To contact me privately please use this e-mail address.)

Stupidity is a rare condition, ignorance is a common choice. --Anon

Top
#2040571 - 02/28/13 06:48 AM Re: Theory of hammer blow distance... [Re: johnlewisgrant]
Olek Online   content
7000 Post Club Member

Registered: 03/14/08
Posts: 7216
Loc: France
There is something relative to hammer blow distance and that is the position of the knuckle and jack at rest, as well as at letoff moment.

SO the hammer blow allows for some variations but the range is not so large. (grand piano)

If the force actiing on the knuckle is pushing on its side too much the knuckle will deform even the wooden core can bend in time , and the knuckle on old pianos is often warped if not unglued, when the hammers have been filed a lot or if the "overblow" is very large (which is not uncommon on some brands)

WHile refining, indeed the stroke can be modified to change the touch or the tone (while it is sometime faster to change directly the key level)

The jack to knuckle relation is changing the dynamics of the shank on one side, and the suppleness of the keys on the other side.
We can use a range from a somewhat "hydrolic" keyboard, to a very springy one, just with variations in jack/knucle and aftertouch..


Edited by Olek (02/28/13 06:50 AM)
_________________________
Isaac OLEG - http://picasaweb.google.fr/PianoOleg pro

Top

Moderator:  Piano World 
What's Hot!!
Our latest Issue is available now...
Piano News - Interesting & Fun Piano Related Newsletter! (free)
-------------------
HOW TO POST PICTURES on the Piano Forums
-------------------
Sharing is Caring!
About the Buttons
-------------------
Forums Rules & Help
-------------------
ADVERTISE
on Piano World

The world's most popular piano web site.
(ad) HAILUN Pianos
Hailun Pianos - Click for More
Ad (Seiler/Knabe)
Knabe Pianos
Sheet Music
(PW is an affiliate)
Sheet Music Plus Featured Sale
(125ad) Dampp Chaser
Dampp Chaser Piano Life Saver
(ad) Lindeblad Piano
Lindeblad Piano Restoration
Who's Online
108 registered (anotherscott, Art_Vandelay, Abby Pianoman, AndrewJCW, 36251, AZ_Astro, 31 invisible), 1451 Guests and 19 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
75553 Members
42 Forums
156221 Topics
2294316 Posts

Max Online: 15252 @ 03/21/10 11:39 PM
New Topics - Multiple Forums
BALDWIN R vs. STEINWAY M
by Karl Watson
07/28/14 08:11 AM
Best Digital Piano for Touch
by JoeCPiano
07/28/14 04:50 AM
Happy Birthday Cinnamonbear!
by Kuanpiano
07/27/14 11:17 PM
Finger "Tapes": Purpose?
by CleverName
07/27/14 10:56 PM
Accessories needed for grand pianos.
by Stevio55
07/27/14 08:31 PM
(ads by Google)

Visit our online store for gifts for music lovers

 
Our Piano Related Classified Ads
| Dealers | Tuners | Lessons | Movers | Restorations | Pianos For Sale | Sell Your Piano |

Advertise on Piano World
| Subscribe | Piano World | PianoSupplies.com | Advertise on Piano World | Donate | Link to Us | Classifieds |
| |Contact | Privacy | Legal | About Us | Site Map | Free Newsletter | Press Room |


copyright 1997 - 2014 Piano World ® all rights reserved
No part of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission