Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Tuner-Technicians Forum Time the hammer makes contact with the string/s

it is , but sure it is not so much perceived

Stacatto and legato depends of the percussion, changes are not as large as we wish, as the control on the hammer is lost more or less late; generally sooner than we believe, but the pianist try to "keep contact" (physically) with the hammer,
That mean in mu opinion that he try to have the jack contacting the hammer and then he also use the impact when the key bottoms to add a little percussion noise in the tone

The impression of "hammer at the tip of the fingers" arise when letoff is precisely regulated, and I suppose the shank flex enough to allow for instance a hammer to "block" on the strings if played with enough force
The small tilt the hammers are generally glued with change the behaviour of the shank and allow small letoff without that sort of "electrical shock" return in the finger when the key is played with enough force

Because letoff may happen after the hammer hit the string in extreme cases, this goes in favor of somewhat more control on the hammer than generally admitted

But if one play with a wooden finger the impact make hammer jump off the knuckle very early and only half of the stroke maintain contact. Manipulation of action resiliency is all about piano touch

May be in stacatto playing the shank have different vibrations than when playing softly, I understand well when the pianist describe how far from key he take his reference plane

as that will modify the amount of contact time between action and hammer

Now some actiopns are setup with the hammer glued with a short angle, less than 90 degree thios move the CG nearer the pivot, so the effort on the shank is more efficient, it is then easier to play fortissimmo, but apparently the reduced shank flexion modes allows then for slightly less dynamic possibles

This also makes the hammers taller hence less well balanced
May be the limited dynamics are also due to twists of the heads on the shanks

The only possible difference I could think of, is in the extraneous noises, before and after the hammer hits the strings:

If the key is played legato, then
1) the finger is already on the key, which is accelerated quite smoothly, i.e. no keyboard attack noise before hammer impact, and
2) the hammer goes into check, i.e. some degree of action noise after hammer impact

But if the key is played staccato and released immediately,
1) the finger is probably off the key and hits it more abruptly, i.e. possibly some keyboard attack noise before hammer impact, and
2) the action returns to rest position without checking, i.e. possibly less (or different) action noise after hammer impact.

If the dampers are up, any mechanical noises can resonate in the soundboard and strings.

But would these differences actually be heard above the note itself? IMHO, no.

'Because letoff may happen after the hammer hit the string in extreme cases, this goes in favor of somewhat more control on the hammer than generally admitted'

That sounds mechanically impossible.

'But would these differences actually be heard above the note itself? IMHO, no'

Me too.

I later posted in here too, Chopin_r_us in order to get the opinion of technicians/tuners that really know how the mechanism works. They can verify that if played at the same velocity, the hammer moves toward the string/s in the same way and is without the player's control, whether it's played with a visual flourish of legato or staccato.

And that was before this topic spread like wildfire

That would be true if the hammer propulsion mechanism was rigid.

What is "the note itself"?

The note itself is the sound minus all extraneous noise.

I would argue that the piano's unique quality of sound is, in fact, the sum of the partial structure and the noise. If we remove the noise (mostly in the attack) from the notes, we no longer hear a piano quality.

The percussive noise of the high treble in a piano is especially necessary to allow the listener to hear the 'music' clearly. This percussiveness is often enhanced in pianos used for concerti.

I dont believe that studies where not conduct comparing the tone of a single note with different touches

Volume (while that can be normalized probably for the study)

STabilisation time (transients) from crash noise to tone

Amount of partials
AMount of longitudininal
AMount of noise

"phantom partials" if they appear at some point


DUe to the structure of tone my suggestion is that the pianist have some maneuverability on tone by changing the mix attack/stabilization (just at the begin of the tone)

The relatively instable structure of the unison and the one of the acoustical structure of the instrument should allow minute modifications that cannot be examined easily and not with as reducing assertions, that should be correct if the hammer hadwean exact path and only acceleration , if the rest of the action was immaterial.

As they are not we are in expectative


To test if hammer can touch the string "before" letoff, regulate it to 0.5 mm and play FF (then call the tuner )
You will feel the action in the key strongly, and chances are that the string will not vibrate normally as the return waves will impact the hammer before letoff is finished

I like simple things but that one sound too reductive to me

the note itself is your term!

I never used the phrase "the note itself" in this thread, so it is not my term.

To me, a note played on an acoustic piano is just that - a note played on an acoustic piano. To discuss any other version of the word 'note' in this thread makes no sense. Correct me if I am mistaken.

Sorry, my bad. It was Mark R what done it! We'll need to wait for his clarification.

With the note itself I meant the sound generated by the strings of that note, from the moment they are struck by the hammer.

This as opposed to noise generated by the keyboard or action, before or after hammer impact. (Examples of which I had described.)

Great. Now perhaps you two can reconcile? Thanks.

Ah-ha. A recording. I suspect that the pianist who gave these examples *could* clearly hear the difference at the keyboard and in the room. Unfortunately for us, we stand hardly a chance to hear the "clear" difference by way of a monaural t.v. recording that has been you-tubi-fied beyond that (as Olek has said very much more succinctly). The difference *can* be heard on the recording, but not well. Alas.

Anyway, I'm just going to restate my point, hoping beyond hope that it is not counted as a non-sequitur: It is possible for one to coax a variety of sounds from the piano, and it has to do with the pianist's "touch." I'm sure you have had the experience of listening to this or that pianist and thinking, "Why does that sound so brittle?," as opposed to, "Wow! That's a nice touch!" I remember one lesson as a teenager when my teacher showed me how to get a "warm" fortissimo by playing from the shoulders and leaning into the piano. And one of the reasons in sharing those examples of notation is to underscore (*ahem*) the notion (*ahem-a-hemma*) that this whole endeavor is so incredibly complex!

RaggedKeyPresser, as you might know, this discussion took off in its own way over in Pianist Corner. In that thread, this interaction between prout and gooddog really said it for me:



The issue is touch, and the way a pianist's touch excites the strings in the flow of a musical context. Staccato vs. legato with the sustain pedal engaged is an extreme example of opposites to demonstrate the concept of tone production and control. In real life, the execution is much more fluid and nuanced, as I am sure you know. (I point back to the Beethoven "Pathetique" example that I referenced, earlier: look at the variety of accent marks in the first measure! ) It is too bad that the YouTube recording cannot properly relate the idea that you are questioning with the kind of clarity that the pianist at the keyboard hears by his efforts. It's like watching a cooking show and missing out on all of the smells and tastes coming from the kitchen, and having the host say, "This tastes sublime! Viewers, you'll just have to take my word for it. I wish you were here."

--Andy

Mark R. stated: The only possible difference I could think of, is in the extraneous noises, before and after the hammer hits the strings:

If the key is played legato, then
1) the finger is already on the key, which is accelerated quite smoothly, i.e. no keyboard attack noise before hammer impact, and
2) the hammer goes into check, i.e. some degree of action noise after hammer impact

But if the key is played staccato and released immediately,
1) the finger is probably off the key and hits it more abruptly, i.e. possibly some keyboard attack noise before hammer impact, and
2) the action returns to rest position without checking, i.e. possibly less (or different) action noise after hammer impact.

If the dampers are up, any mechanical noises can resonate in the soundboard and strings.

But would these differences actually be heard above the note itself? IMHO, no.

I am OK with using the phrase "the note itself" to mean "only the partial structure of the sound, where all the partials are somewhat related to the idealised harmonic structure of a bowed string".

I also agree with the rest of Mark R.'s statements, except the last paragraph. The noises of the fingers and action are clearly heard by the pianist, and by someone standing next to the piano. On my BB, I hear my nails hitting the keys - telling me its time to cut them. I hear the dampers rise and fall - annoying, but part of the intimate sound of a very resonant piano. On one of my DPs, the noise of the keybed is modelled into the overall simulated sound of the individual notes, and on the other, the sampled sounds include all the noise generated by each note at 32 different velocities, as well as, sadly, poorly tuned unisons and the odd Reverse Well Temperament!

I'm surprised staccato touch involves not playing from the surface of the key - the only difference afterall being the length of the note.

While it is possible to play a sequence of staccato notes without lifting the fingers off the keys, it is much easier to lift the finger from the key. This allows for a more fluid finger/hand/wrist/arm/shoulder motion, and more accurate timing of the length of the staccato.

Chopin's own fingering of very delicate staccato passages often uses 5,5,5,..., clearly indicating that the finger is lifted off the key before proceeding to the next note.

Lifting the finger off, which obviously must happen nearly all the tiime, and playing from the surface are two different things. Also, gravity being gravity, it makes no difference how fast you do so,

Hi Andy,

In this connection it is worth mentioning that a lot of pianists strive for a "metallic" sheen in the sound. Above all the best pianist at achieving this is Dmitri Ratser, and he does it regardless of the piano or the repertoire involved.

As here in some Glinka-Liszt:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAyua5KhvMw

And here in Hummel's Piano Concerto No. 2:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tG6q4f42uBw

And if one watches his playing one sees how much of the key acceleration is actuated by "attacking" from above key surface with a very abrupt acceleration of the mechanism rather than a more smooth (and hopefully well felt and controlled all the way through) acceleration from key surface.

These differences in timbre are best heard in person, as you say. And I've been around too long, and heard and seen to much, to conclude otherwise than that how the keys are accelerated does impart aspects of motion to the hammers and hammer shanks that result in variation of timbre.

I still remember a Hamburg Steinway B that I played, achieving a very robust and singing tone. A friend of mine, who is a composer, and I, returned to the piano later and he played it - the sound was glassy and hollow at all levels of dynamic, and it had nothing to do with how chords were voiced, the phrasing, the pedaling, et c.

And I can think of other dramatic examples of that sort where the piano was not the variable, it was the pianists who were playing it.

Some makes of grand piano tend to constrict and filter out this variation, others are very open sounding and open to it such as the N.Y. Steinway D - which is why sometimes even a good condition N.Y. D sounds horrible at times when a pianist doesn't know, or hasn't been trained in how, to control the tone production. I think this might be why some pianists do not like the N.Y. Steinway D, due to its perceived "inconsistency" which some pianists can not control, abandoning them to quite audibly change timbre on almost every note of a phrase.

An Imperial Bösendorfer with its highly refined sound is much safer, for example. It is almost impossible to vary the timbre of an Imperial Bösendorfer, though through skillful pedaling, voicing, dynamics, accentuation, one still can get a broad band of quite varying effects with the one shade of timbre.

In my opinion, with the hammers, hammer shanks, keys and strings all moving not only on a plane, it is about much more than hammer velocity defined and measured on a plane, and variation in timbre - with some makes of grand piano more or less open to this than others - is possible.