The piano as two different instruments/Note attack and decay

Now we are getting into the mystical, inexplicable nature of the instrument. There are many things that happen in terms of sonority depending on one's touch: I can't explain why, I just know it works that way. Playing with more or less weight can make your tone juicier or harsher, depending on how you do it. This is illogical because the only thing you can really vary is the speed of the hammer. But IT HAPPENS and is clearly demonstrable. I believe the underlying, unperceived variable which is really at work here is precision of attack. When you are physically more well-organized, you use less force to achieve better tonal results because you can more precisely vary the degree of touch strength and thus create a wider variety of dynamic levels. Certainly you cannot vary the part of the hammer head that strikes the string, only the amount of it. Bt if you TRY to vary that you may well succeed in entering that strange world where subtle changes in your attack create a beautiful opening of tone - it is really mysterious and wonderful! AFF

Now we are getting into the mystical, inexplicable nature of the instrument. My hypothesis is that there is only one variable: speed of the hammer. However, our ear seems to be more sensitive to timbral variations than to loudness variations. So in a good piano (my definition), a piano that perceptible changes timbre with, relatively, minor loudness variations, we hear different colors at the same perceived loudness. That is why we get the impression that we can control timbre independently from loudness. I dare to guess, without evidence, that this property comes with the nonlinearity of the right kind of hammer: at low speeds the hammer is soft, at higher speeds the hammer felt compacts momentarily becoming harder and producing a different timbre. ocd

Alan, to whom are you responding? If you intended what you wrote to be an answer to what I wrote, I don't think you've addressed my straightforward questions at all. I _am interested in your answers to the questions I posed. Playing with more or less weight can make your tone juicier or harsher, depending on how you do it. This is illogical because the only thing you can really vary is the speed of the hammer. But IT HAPPENS and is clearly demonstrable. I find it difficult to make sense of what you write. Would you explain what you mean? Maybe you do in what follows. I believe the underlying, unperceived variable which is really at work here is precision of attack. When you are physically more well-organized, you use less force to achieve better tonal results because you can more precisely vary the degree of touch strength and thus create a wider variety of dynamic levels. So by "precision of attack" do you mean "precise control of the dynamic level"? If so, then you have explained what you said was inexplicable, which of course means that it is not inexplicable! John Link

My hypotheses is that there is only one variable: speed of the hammer. So you disagree with Bob t that weight can also be varied. Your hypothesis is consistent with my experience that I reported above. However, our ear seems to be more sensitive to timbral variations than to loudness variations. What is the basis of your claim?

My hypotheses is that there is only one variable: speed of the hammer. So you disagree with Bob t that weight can also be varied. Your hypothesis is consistent with my experience that I reported above. However, our ear seems to be more sensitive to timbral variations than to loudness variations. What is the basis of your claim? It is only a hypothesis based on my experience. I know of no experimental substantiation. ocd

Who is _that?

He's Chris Hansen () He'd like you to have a seat over there.

He's Chris Hansen () He'd like you to have a seat over there. I don't understand.

My hypothesis is that there is only one variable: speed of the hammer. This really isn't true though. I'm stunned that this vast oversimplification is still put out in the name of 'science'. Imagine the difference between punching and pushing a trolley into motion. This is a slightly different circumstance, but it illustrates how there are very different ways of setting something in motion- some more efficient than others. To assume that speed is the only factor is to assume that the hammer is flawlessly stiff. If it has even the slighest bend, you can be certain that there will be a different in the way it travels when started slowly and smoothly accelerated- compared to if it is started very fast in the first place. To illustrate this, take a thin, folded magazine and practising flicking it fowards in different ways. Some ways make it flex more than others. The idea that final speed would be only factor is pure nonsense. This doesn't 'prove' that this can account for differences in tone but, importantly, it DOES demonstrate that there's a lot more going on than a single hammer speed. Even basic level school physics doesn't tend to depend on simplifications that are quite so severe. I don't dispute that a substantial proportion is owed to creating false impressions with balance etc, but genuine application of science really doesn't suggest that the only factor is involved is hammer speed. However small the other factors may be, there's every reason to believe that they are responsible for something. I don't know who started these often-heard claims, but I find it hard to believe that person was much of a scientist.