Does 'tone' really exist?!

[anamnesis]

I doubt that the percussive noises make much difference in a fortissimo: the intensity of the actual sound coming from the soundboard will probably cover the percussive noises on the keyboard.

I think it works like this: in a "banging" fortissimo, the pianist plays everything, be it melody, accompaniment or secondary voices, at the upper dynamic limit. The phrases have no musical shape and the rhythm is stiff due to extreme physical tension. This is tiring for the listener's ears: all we hear is someone banging the keys.

In a "non banging" fortissimo, the pianist is not at the limit: there is room for the phrase to have a musical shape. There are also different levels of intensity between the hands and between notes in the same hands, creating ever changing differences of texture. The pianist stays supple and fluid and the rhythm likewise. Maybe this pianist is at times hitting the keys as hard as the "banging" pianist, but we hear the variations, we hear the elasticity of the rhythm, we hear expressive accents instead of aggressive bangs.

Yes, I think that is a much better explanation.  

The banging fortissimo, is primarily the result of lacking any subtlety in the gradations and shape of phrase and texture.  The movement patterns that encourage this sort of subtlety in my experience also happen to minimize the percussive noises that the pianist sitting in front of the instrument will notice.  

Taking a search in her book, it also seems that Abby Whiteside also happens to articulate your exact point in her book:

One cannot "color" a piano tone, but the word is habitually used to describe a sensitive performance. There is no such thing as a "singing" tone with the piano. The piano tone diminishes in volume from its very inception. What is meant is a succession of tones which leads the. ear forward to a completed statement because of the subtlety in the use of dynamics. There is no "harsh" tone. There is simply a succession of loud tones which have no subtlety in gradation of intensity and perhaps, in fact very likely, have a greater amount of percussive noise than is necessary, because of a faulty delivery of power power delivered below the level where the hammer trips as the key is depressed. It is only fair to state that these percussive noises do not carry in the hall and cannot be heard beyond the first few rows; of course the lack of sensitivity in gradation of dynamics is heard.

Abby Whiteside. Abby Whiteside on Piano Playing: Indispensables of Piano Playing and Mastering the Chopin Etudes and Other Essays (Kindle Locations 3235-3240). Kindle Edition.

[brogers70]

The argument that it's BS seems to run as follows: we can't think of any physical explanation of what's happening, therefore tone in a single note doesn't exist. If science had proceeded in that way it wouldn't have got far. An alternative procedure might be to observe from experience that one can vary tone in a single note - something I do every time I play - and explore reasons for it.

I think that the argument it is BS relies on experiments showing the inability of listeners to distinguish differences in tone in individual, isolated notes at the same volume from the same piano, regardless of whether the pianist producing those notes is attempting to vary the tone.

[michael_sayers]

Newton doesn't need to be cited in that paper because his laws of motion are simply common knowledge to any physicist. You will rarely find Newton's laws cited in any scientific paper for that reason. For a physicist it is a simple known fact that a piano hammer, like any other object, will obey Newton's laws. I only needed to cite Newton when suggestions that the hammers would be acting contrary to these laws appeared.

Hi michael_c,

The persons who implented the study were not physicists.  They were, if I recall correctly, electrical engineers.  Why is their profession relevant?  Speaking of Newton, the last time I checked, Isaac Newton did not have a degree in physics, although he was quite adept at Latin.


Mvh,
Michael

[michael_c]

One must try an experiment to see…Recording oneself playing from very quiet to very loud, on a Single tone, employing One particular arm movement…Then trying another arm movement -- or any of the myriad ways a note could be struck--   and for those who believe that they can affect the 'tone' quality -then employ That for the second recording of playing very quiet to very loud on a single note….  Then, listen back and compare …does the pianissimo tone of a single note vary between the two recordings…And What of the Fortissimo?…  Does that have a qualitative difference between the 2 recordings? That, Being as the same volume yet a Different timbre?

And this has been tried many times. Never has a difference been found. It's so simple, though: let a "master" of tonal control sit at a piano, place a microphone next to the piano and let the pianist play the same note as often as he/she likes, with all the different touches that are supposed to create different tone colours. If we could find two different instances of that same note, at the same dynamic intensity but with a different timbre, the "tone master" will have proved their point.

[michael_sayers]

The listener is gripped by the tonal effect of music played by a great pianist. The pianist uses the means of the piano to transmit the tonal world inside his head into the listener's head.

The real magic happens inside our heads: the pianist shapes a phrase, rhythmically and in intensity, as it would be shaped by a good singer and we hear that phrase as a whole with a sensation of legato, with a feeling of one note running into another, even though each note is decaying just as fast as it always does. We hear warmth, sadness, longing in the tone because the art of the pianist brings us to create these feelings in our heads, just as the art of a novelist brings us to create the most diverse emotions in our heads when we read a book, even though we are only looking at rows of black signs on white paper.

Hi michael_c,

So now we are going to call in - in addition to Isaac Newton and Bruce Clark - also Thomas Wolfe, Honore de Balzac and Joseph Conrad to support your hypothesis?

You were not there that day, and you did not hear what I heard.  If you had heard it, you might be singing a bit of a different tune right now.


Mvh,
Michael

[vansh]

I sort of hesitate to wade into this because it's pretty clear that some people aren't really bothering to think through other people's points and refute them, but instead just repeat or make fun of what people say, as if saying the same things again makes them more correct.

At any rate, several points:

* Yes, Newton is correct (at least for non-relativistic speeds), F = ma. What's not correct is assuming that it's of primary relevance for whether or not different tones can be generated at the same volume (and assuming same pedal conditions, etc.) for a single note. For example, if you knock a tuning fork off a table, would you use F = ma to describe the sound that it will make as it flies through the air? No, because that's used to describe its trajectory, not how it internally oscillates (and thus producing its sound).
* Additionally, people are saying all over the place that the only thing that matters once the hammer leaves the escapement mechanism is its velocity. This is a modeling assumption and not necessarily representative of reality, nor is there any attempt to justify this assumption. For example, the hammer isn't a free object moving in space, it's attached to a shank, which in turn is attached to other components. In other words the assembly, with the hammer at one end, will vibrate as the hammer moves upwards to contact the string (sort of like a diving board). This isn't accounted for by simply stating F = ma as if that's all there is to a piano. In fact, I think people sort of gave the game away by citing a piano technician saying that yes, pianos have this effect, but then still saying the hammer's velocity is the only relevant parameter.
* Related to this, people are conflating two separate issues here. One is whether or not you can affect the hammer in any way once it leaves the mechanism. The other is whether or not the hammer velocity when it leaves the mechanism is the only relevant parameter in determining the tone (other than side things like damper pedal use, etc.).
* Also, it seems like pretty much nobody has any grasp of the actual relevant physics for the phenomenon at hand (and I'm not claiming to be an expert on it either). Maybe that's why people just end up talking past each other without actually trying to discuss the relevant points that would resolve the question.

From just 5 minutes of Googling (and maybe around 15 minutes of actual reading), it seems like this paper gives more clarity on this subject than pretty much most of this thread so far:

https://www.speech.kth.se/prod/publications/files/qpsr/1991/1991_32_4_019-034.pdf

The conclusion seems to be that yes the hammer-and-shank assembly flexes, yes the contact location (of hammer on string) changes depending on the touch (although much smaller than how much it changes based on velocity), and yes there was a difference in the sound spectrum based on touch. In other words, most of the modeling assumptions in this thread is incorrect. However, for this last point, the difference in the sound spectrum was only several decibels, so it's debatable whether or not someone can actually hear this difference. (That the difference is at the higher frequencies isn't surprising, since I would surmise that differences between the harmonics relative to the fundamental is precisely what would make up "tone" if it were to exist in a single note.)

In other words, if it matters, it has a minor effect. (There are possible other effects that could be relevant, such as the sound of the key striking the keybed, which the paper mentions but doesn't test explicitly.) It's possible then that when people are talking about good "tone" for a single note they're talking about the relative loudness (and possible time delay) between the sound of the note and the sound of the keybed; I would not offhandedly assume that the sound of the key hitting the keybed is negligible. However, in terms of causing the hammer to strike the string and excite different harmonics, it seems to be pretty minor.

[michael_sayers]

* Yes, Newton is correct (at least for non-relativistic speeds), F = ma. What's not correct is assuming that it's of primary relevance for whether or not different tones can be generated at the same volume (and assuming same pedal conditions, etc.) for a single note. For example, if you knock a tuning fork off a table, would you use F = ma to describe the sound that it will make as it flies through the air? No, because that's used to describe its trajectory, not how it internally oscillates (and thus producing its sound).

Hi vansh,

Maybe you forgot that according to michael_c we now are supposed to be using the great novelists as well and for a source of information on the subject of piano playing?

Let's see here . . . okay, here is something that relates to piano playing . . .

"History repeats itself, but the special call of an art which has passed away is never reproduced. It is as utterly gone out of the world as the song of a destroyed wild bird."
- Joseph Conrad

And here is something else, also related to piano playing, and by the same author:

"In order to move others deeply we must deliberately allow ourselves to be carried away beyond the bounds of our normal sensibility."
- Joseph Conrad

There is much food for thought here, I think.

p.s. - Thanks for your insightful post.


Mvh,
Michael

[vansh]

Note: Re-reading this thread, it looks like the paper I linked has already been mentioned in this thread (must've missed it in all that spam). However, the paper was used to support assertions that the paper's author did not make:

The vibrations simply add an element of unpredictability as to exactly where the hammer strikes the key, and possibly in which horizontal direction the contact point moves during the strike. These effects are completely out of the pianist's control, but happily for the pianist, as long as the shank is sufficiently rigid the effects are so small that they cannot be heard (see for instance Askenfeld, Measuring the motion of the piano hammer during string contact.)

The paper's author actually states "The influence of touch on the horizontal hammer motion was much smaller than the differences evoked by the changes in dynamic level" not that it was unpredictable, and in fact, with the soft shank states "The difference in horizontal displacement at striking between a legato and strained touch in forte was between 0.1 and 0.2 mm" which means that the pianist's technique (i.e. using legato or staccato in this case) does cause a difference. The main question, then, is not whether or not there is a difference (the paper states that there is), but whether or not the difference is large enough to be perceived.

What I find interesting with the paper is that there are differences in the sound spectra with different types of touch (legato vs staccato) with the soft shank, but not with the normal shank. The soft shank was artificially produced by removing wood from a normal shank, however, so it's the normal shank that more closely represents the shanks in pianos (presumably).

[j_menz]

I sort of hesitate to wade into this

You shouldn't. Thanks for the link to the article. As I read it it does suggest that there is a second quality (aside from velocity) imparted to the hammer mechanism - horizontal movement - which is in some degree controllable by the pianist. It's results on what actual effect this has are somewhat inconclusive it seems (and made harder to visualise given that the graphs  are not reproduced satisfactorily). A possibly interesting field for further research. It seems, in any case, that the effects are small - it being an open question if they are in practice too small to be discernable.

[8_octaves]

You shouldn't. Thanks for the link to the article. As I read it it does suggest that there is a second quality (aside from velocity) imparted to the hammer mechanism - horizontal movement - which is in some degree controllable by the pianist. It's results on what actual effect this has are somewhat inconclusive it seems (and made harder to visualise given that the graphs  are not reproduced satisfactorily). A possibly interesting field for further research. It seems, in any case, that the effects are small - it being an open question if they are in practice too small to be discernable.

Yes, it would be very desirable to have access to a CONTROLLED horizontal movement of the hammers. But the effect is neither new, nor had it been unnoticed by the piano manufacturers.
So, they made the UNA CORDA-pedal ( and, possibly, similar ones ).

But, as an example, to "pull" or "push" a single key itself sideways after the hammer has escaped, will a ) be uncontrolled, b ) without effect, c ) even if it had a small effect, it won't be reproducable in a controlled way, and d ) playing on different instruments, it will be even more impossible, because of the individual materials / offset ( mm ) of the keys to one another / etc.

For actual piano playing it's like this: To actually control and change the tone color of a played tone, we have to intervene at the strings. Only if we were able to stay in contact to the string, and then, e.g., with additional pressure or decreasing, and then again increasing pressure we can influence the timbre. I have given the example of the Clavichord already.

Was that too difficult to understand? ( And even THEN a Clavichord-player will have to VERY WELL be able to control the sound, because very easily, when he tries to get the same result a 2nd time, it will be difficult to achieve.

And here are uncontrollable ( because not reproducable ) horizontal-movements of the hammer-mechanic mentioned, which, AFTER the point of escapement "can be consciously applied by a pianist playg a piano to change tone color ?" Sorry, guys. 

They cannot even be applied BEFORE reaching the point of escapement, UNLESS via una corda.

The challenge stays: Play a "C", and then, during it is heard, try to change its tone color by miraculous motions. You won't succeed.

In the same way, the behavior of hammer shanks isn't consciously influencable. To test this, one has to give a pianist a diagram with a curve that shows an oscillating for example "C"- hammer shank. And then, ask him to play the C, but so that its result will be the same curve. Then record the curve of the shank, and compare the two. And you will notice, that they look differently.     

Cordially, 8_octaves.

[michael_sayers]

Yes, it would be very desirable to have access to a CONTROLLED horizontal movement of the hammers. But the effect is neither new, nor had it been unnoticed by the piano manufacturers.
So, they made the UNA CORDA-pedal ( and, possibly, similar ones ).

Hi 8_octaves,

In addition to the una corda pedal, piano makers also have produced a due corde pedal which is for two strings.  One can see, for instance, in the music manuscripts of Beethoven that he refers to due corde as something separate from una corda.

Contemporary piano production has only the due corde pedal, and yet it is incorrectly referred to as the una corda pedal.

p.s. - One of the grand pianos which are known to have been in the possession of Ludwig van Beethoven had five pedals.


Mvh,
Michael

[brogers70]

p.s. - One of the grand pianos which are known to have been in the possession of Ludwig van Beethoven had five pedals.

Mvh,
Michael

Has he told you whether he liked playing it?

[timothy42b]

You shouldn't. Thanks for the link to the article. As I read it it does suggest that there is a second quality (aside from velocity) imparted to the hammer mechanism - horizontal movement - which is in some degree controllable by the pianist.

You're reaching for an alternative explanation for an effect which HAS NOT been demonstrated.

If we had some evidence that tone could change, it would be worth exploring all possible reasons for it.  But at this point we do not.

[j_menz]

You're reaching for an alternative explanation for an effect which HAS NOT been demonstrated.

If we had some evidence that tone could change, it would be worth exploring all possible reasons for it.  But at this point we do not.

No, I'm looking at what may or may not be controllable.  The result appears to be negligible, but the study does show that there is more that we can impart via a keystroke than velocity pure and simple. The study cited does not by any means establish that that, in any practical setting, alters the sound, but it is useful in establishing the physics.

Not to your point exactly, but arising from some earlier posts, there are two separate questions on tone - whether the touch can influence it pre-escapement and whether it can alter it post-escapement. The cited study only deals with pre-escapement control.

[michael_sayers]

Has he told you whether he liked playing it?

Hi brogers70,

No he hasn't.  Maybe you can provide me with his email address?  I hope it isn't anything such as LvB @ 666.org


Mvh,
Michael

[timothy42b]

Not to your point exactly, but arising from some earlier posts, there are two separate questions on tone - whether the touch can influence it pre-escapement and whether it can alter it post-escapement. The cited study only deals with pre-escapement control.

Those two questions arise AFTER we accept the assumption that tone does change.

Since it does not, at least not detectably, there is little reason to ask those questions.

However when we do ask those questions, it subtly alters our thinking so that we fall into the trap of thinking tone probably does change.

[sashaco]

Michael and 8 octaves,

The piece being played in the video is The Graceful Ghost by William Bolcom.  It does not sound very much like Joplin, by the way- I'm surprised you could be fooled.  It's a great piece, though.

Cheers, Sasha

[michael_sayers]

Michael and 8 octaves,

The piece being played in the video is The Graceful Ghost by William Bolcom.  It does not sound very much like Joplin, by the way- I'm surprised you could be fooled.  It's a great piece, though.

Cheers, Sasha

Hi Sasha,

Indeed you are quite right!  As the music presumably still is copy protected, I am going to inquire about obtaining the rights to record it for YouTube, and maybe elsewhere as long as no one is making any money off it . . . of course, technically YouTube would be making money off of it, or maybe not since that company hasn't turned a profit in a very long time based I what I've read, but maybe in some sense cash flow still would be involved [with YouTube, but not with me] . . . either way, hopefully something can be worked out that will cover all possibilities without there needing to be a ten page contract just to put a recording on YouTube and maybe elsewhere as defined within particular parameters (and I am no lawyer, so I wouldn't even know exactly what needs to be specified or not as the parameters to cover all instances and their permutations . . . as well, the environment is always changing and evolving . . . but I do know that I don't want to get any unwanted letters from a composer's lawyer, so it is wise to sort things like this out rather than just do a recording and put it online somewhere).

This is why I avoid all copy protected music, because everything surrounding the music and its "performance" and the "distribution" of the audio gets so complicated and time consuming, and is way beyond my ken to even evaluate accurately!

I wanted to record some of Aaron Copland's piano music, but it appears that one has to have a grant to do it, and either way all the information about it is way too baroque and obscure for me to make heads or tells out of [what in the world are some of the things they are talking about?], so I didn't even bother to contact the foundation which owns the rights to the music.

I made an exception for four compositions by Ervin Nyiregyhazi, yet all of this sort of thing is very complicated and is a lot of work vs. just recording something that is in the public domain, or my own music.

Thanks for identifying the composer and the composition!


Mvh,
Michael

[sashaco]

For what it's worth, I can't imagine William Bolcom, who is a great guy as well as a wonderful composer and entertaining performer, getting upset at someone playing a piece of his on youtube.  He doesn't seem to have sued the lady in the video, who plays it with a jaunty swing and very pretty cadences.

[michael_sayers]

For what it's worth, I can't imagine William Bolcom, who is a great guy as well as a wonderful composer and entertaining performer, getting upset at someone playing a piece of his on youtube.  He doesn't seem to have sued the lady in the video, who plays it with a jaunty swing and very pretty cadences.

Hi Sasha,

You are right, yet any pretence to professionalism requires a musician to go through all legally required steps, doesn't it?  What if William Bolcom dies and the inheritor of the copyright for this particular composition is short on cash flow or isn't an entirely nice person?


Mvh,
Michael

[8_octaves]

Michael and 8 octaves,

The piece being played in the video is The Graceful Ghost by William Bolcom.  It does not sound very much like Joplin, by the way- I'm surprised you could be fooled.  It's a great piece, though.

Cheers, Sasha

Hi Sasha,

MANY thanks for the info!!

Cordially, 8_octaves!!