The physical school of thought believes, because of the laws of physics/construction of the piano, that the tone produced by any pianist can only vary within a quite limited continuum. Thus the force applied to the instrument becomes a prime factor, and then I believe also the speed as well. But is there not a relationship between our tone and what can be emotionally conveyed through the instrument? This is where we should step back and consider the greater picture of individuality in our playing. We can convey emotion and feeling. We can immediately recognize the playing of Arthur Rubinstein because the instrument is capable of transmitting his soul. Or rather that human beings are of such power that we can affect the inert. The "hard" physics are therefore responsive to the emotional spectrum with which we can draw from. So being inflexible in this particular matter, matters of mere force and speed, having only a continued eye on the physics, deceives from what experience reveals. I see a relationship in this to science, which arrogates a hold on truth, overstepping its boundaries of physical fact, for us in force and speed, a demagnifying of nature. A transgression rich in time can be quenched always the same with truth's unvarying anvil.
[...]pianist? In no language is there a word which is foolish by itself. Even the word "foolish" is not foolish; it's a word. But the slightest sentence can already be foolish or intelligent. And one tone has no esthetic value whatsoever unless in connection with other tones. No pianist plays one tone and then goes away; he plays a musical piece, with all its unlimited possibilites and variations. [...] A violinist, of course, can influence the quality of his tone because he is in direct contact with string. His vibrato can change the character of the tone considerably, or he can bow in infinitely different ways. Here we change the color of the tone only by changing the intensity. Each intensity has its own color due to the partials, or sounds produced by portions of the string which vibrate in turn after it is struck. For instance, if I strike this low C [graphics are added here], there are included in the sound [graphics are added here, of the partial-tones]. The number of partials included in the sound depends on how loudly we play. As you can see, some partials embellish the fundamental tone, but too many make it harsh and spoil it. An "empty" tone has too few. All of this sounds prosaic now, but there is still the possibility of playing beautifully, and I will speak about it later.[...]
[...] And melody is a tremendously important part of music, though modern composers don't recognize it ( or perhaps they are taking into consideration this peculiarity of the piano and therefore don't write very beautiful melodies. ) . How shall we proceed then to play beautiful melodies like everyone else? We have to find some way, if not to play a real legato, to find a substitute for it.A few years ago, a student said to me, "Mr. ..., please don't look," and played twice an arpeggio with pedal, and asked me to say which was legato and which staccato. He did this ten times, and ten times I guessed correctly the difference. He said, "Yes, there is a clear difference. But actually, there shouldn't be any difference when I use pedal." And this bothered me. I tried it out with my other students, and almost one hundred percent of them noticed a difference between the two arpeggios. I didn't know why, because it seemed to me too that they should sound the same. I went to a famous physicist, a specialist in acoustics, who said it was nonsense, of course there was no difference, and you couldn't hear it. But this didn't console me, because I heard it and so did everyone else.So I had almost 2 years of sleepless nights.Then one day I was sitting at the piano trying to figure it out (being always lazy about practicing) ; I tried with pedal and without, and noticed that with one single note there was no difference between legato and staccato with pedal.Then the light came and I called my student and told him to come over. I said, Quote"Please, turn around now and don't look, and you won't hear any difference if I play just one note. The whole thing is that when we are playing a succession of notes staccato we have a TENDENCY to play the tones EVENLY, and when we play legato we take some kind of crescendo, diminuendo, or ritardando. And if you played staccato WITH this rubato, using pedal, it would sound just like legato."A rhythmically and dynamically even line never sounds completely legato on the piano. I will play a very legato scale -- it doesn't sound like a melody, does it? Now I will play the same scale with "expression", and you will hear the difference.Being poor in legato and rich in dynamics, we must cheat and substitute for a real legato some kind of dynamic or tempo inflection. And it is what we are rich in that is our blessing -- dynamic and tempo possibilities.That doesn't seem like very much, but it is more than you might think, and if we add the wealth of sounds that the pedals give us, all this makes the piano what the Russians call "royal" -- the king of instruments.[...]
"Please, turn around now and don't look, and you won't hear any difference if I play just one note. The whole thing is that when we are playing a succession of notes staccato we have a TENDENCY to play the tones EVENLY, and when we play legato we take some kind of crescendo, diminuendo, or ritardando. And if you played staccato WITH this rubato, using pedal, it would sound just like legato."
I guess what I am getting at - and back to Vladimir Horowitz - is that, though he is known for his flat fingered technique [as was Liszt], he also used curved fingers, straight fingers, et c., to achieve the myriad of tonal effects he wanted.
A staccato passage that is pedaled through should sound different than if it were played legato and pedaled through, depending on one's staccato technique(s), the angle of "attack", the shape of one's fingers to facilitate the desired tone, and many other things which also include the grand piano in question.
There are reasons so many pianists have preferred N.Y. Steinway grands . . . [snip]
About grand piano hammer shanks, these are drop tested for resonance and sorted from the bass through the treble.
They are far more flexible than one would suppose. There are close up videos much better than the ones at Youtube which show this, and the double contact with the strings, and other such things. How a key is accelerated definitely effects the energies of the hammer/hammer shanks for transference into the two contacts with the strings and with how much purity - or dissipation of energy and distortion - relative to the desired resonances.
There are many theories of piano technique and each has its differences.
How a key is accelerated definitely effects the energies of the hammer/hammer shanks for transference into the two contacts with the strings and with how much purity - or dissipation of energy and distortion - relative to the desired resonances.
I'm sorry, but your use of the word definitely does not make you any more convincing.Why should I believe this, when it is contrary not only to theory but to decades of experimental evidence? (I have tactfully refrained from commenting on the improper grammar of "effects" vs "affects" because this is an international list and I don't know if you are a native English speaker.)
Most piano technicians and musicians don't really understand this idea of flex in a hammer shank. Commonly, flex is thought of as the shank bending backwards when the key is initially struck. Somewhere around halfway through its motion the shank and hammer spring forward so, upon impact, the hammer is travelling faster than it otherwise would. Thus, the commenter believing that a flexible shank helps the hammer rebound from the string faster.Many of us were taught this; however this idea is completely wrong.What is referred as flex is more properly referred to as an oscillation. If you view our high speed videos, and I think someone else put the link up in this conversation, you will see what I mean. This video was shot at 7000 frames a second by the company utilized by, among others, Myth Busters.Upon actuation by the key we see a number of action parts bending from the load. The weight of the hammer causes the shank to bend backwards however this is very short lived. The hammer and shank then return to 'zero' and then overshoot. At this point, the hammer winds up forward from where it should be with the shank bent the opposite way that intuitively we would suppose. And then this process repeats several times, that is oscillates, before the hammer hits the string. Because the hammer can be moving front to back in either direction when it hits the string, likely the orientation of the hammer in relation to the strike point is random upon contact. The hammer may hit on either side of the proper strike point.
There are close up videos much better than the ones at Youtube which show this, and the double contact with the strings, and other such things.
Here's some more information on those bending hammer shanks. In a discussion at Pianoworld.com about composite hammer shanks, Bruce Clark, an engineer from Mason and Hamlin, goes into some detail on what happens while the hammer is moving towards the string:
Hi, Michael,I thought that a double contact between hammer and strings only happened in incorrectly regulated actions. Are you saying that there is always a double contact? Do you have a reference that documents this phenomenon?
Hi michael_c,Yes, in grand pianos there always is a double contact between hammer and strings. I wish I could give a reference for this - unfortunately my music library is back in the U.S.Has P.E. [?] Bruce Clark not noticed this?Mvh,Michael
[...]This little thing you see here called the "hopper" or "jack" pushes the bar as soon as the hammer reaches a certain level and it slides away under the hammer so that the hammer falls down. Actually, the hammer escapes even before it should reach the string, but is moved farther by MOMENTUM. [...]
[...]The best exercise is not Hanon, but one in which you first imagine a tone or succession or phrase and then try to play it exactly as you imagined it, the same way each time. And it will be difficult.
Many years ago there was a champion chess player named Dr. Steiner ...[Addition by me: He was wrong here, or in the tape-recording it wasn't understood correctly by his student who typewrote it, because he should have meant the Chess-Grandmaster Wilhelm Steinitz, who was, ca. 1900, of the opinion that, by electrical power radiating from himself, he could move chessmen by sheer force of his will - thus, he had to go to mental hospital.]... who eventually went mad and imagined that he could move chessmen by only the effort of his will; I assure you I have not gone that far. I do not believe we can move the keys by the mere effort of our will; we have certainly to move our fingers. How to do so in the most practical and rational ways I will discuss in detail later.
Hi Michael, I don't think whether there's one, two or three contacts between hammer and strings would bring us very much further, speaking of the "tone" - question. Because, the contacts of hammers to strings occur after the point of escapement, and are thus, referring to people who want to CHANGE THE TONE COLOR even then, not controllable.What I COULD imagine, is the following fictional scenario:The hammer presses "into" the string, and the string gets energy. It gets deformed, - and NOW, fictionally, we STOP the hammer(head), which has just pressed "into" the string.. . The string itself begins to oscillate, and thus, swings BACK and re-touches, after having oscillated BACK, the hammerhead / felt, (which is - fictionally - still in position.)But however: All these activities in real pianos and grands aren't controllable by the piano player. As we can see, "Momentum" is important here, and Michael_c has already mentioned this word!But, it's sometimes funny, too, to read about what people think they can do.The man I quoted was VERY humorous! He said this:That's what, at the beginning of this thread, already was stated by a foreposter: "It's difficult." But nobody has stated that playing piano would be easy, I think. Ah, I forgot the humorous aspect: If we could by the sheer force of our will influence the behavior of keys, strings and hammers, that would be nice, I think. But unfortunately, our evolution perhaps will need a while, still, until we will be able to achieve that. Cordially, 8_octaves!
Rehi Michael_sayers,even Hofmann and Horowitz have to accept the laws of physics. And they prescribe:The hammer, if once "escaped", cannot be actively controlled. It makes its journey - from a certain point onwards - to the strings alone, free, and with no chance to influence it.ALL chances to influence lie PRIOR to the point of escapement. HERE we all, and Hofmann, and Horowitz, can apply technique (which is directly connected to musicality) to produce what is nearest to our imagination and concept.But when the hammer has gone past the point of escapement, then - aside from the pedals, which are there, and which are very important - there's no way to influence further things.As the teacher I've quoted said: Play on a given piano a "C" , with a given intensity, and while it sounds, try to change the tone color: It isn't possible, Michael. Because of laws of physics.Additionally consider the - in my opinion - very relevant and important words to the legato- / staccato - topic. And how we TREAT / how our TENDENCIES are in playing successive notes.Therein lies the art. But not in an impossible mission. And impossible is, to change the tone color after the point of escapement. No chance. Sorry, Michael, this time.
The focus is not on any ability to act upon a hammer while it is in free flight to the strings, the focus is on the ability to act upon a hammer and hammer shank while these are being accelerated.
[...] Now let's discuss tone intensity. I have asked European audiences, great and small, the simple question: "What determines lesser or greater intensity?" I am not asking whether you use your arm, forearm, or elbow; don't think of the player, think of the key itself. I have seldom received the correct answer, and then usually from en engineer or physicist, but never from a pianist.The answer: the SPEED of key descent; if it's slow, the sound is soft, if it's fast, the sound is loud. I told this to one of my dear students last week, a brilliant pianist, and he objected,Quote from: Student What do you mean? We can play very fast and loud, or very fast and soft."Well, he confused two different speeds, and this you must not do. I am not speaking about the speed of succession, as in a run or glissando; I am speaking about the descent of EACH INDIVIDUAL KEY.
What do you mean? We can play very fast and loud, or very fast and soft."
[...]In how many ways do you think a tone can be produced by moving the key dowm? Most people answer, "One".Actually, there are three possibilities. The first and most common is to move the key from top to bottom, three eighths of an inch. The second is to move from the top to the point of escapement, about halfway down. And the last, from this point to the bottom. [Addition by me: Because of the above mentioned double-escapement-mechanism in many instruments.]This is true on every grand piano. In any case, we shouldn't move the key too slowly, because if the hopper has not enough speed, the hammer slides from it, failing even to contact the string. Now you see that if you want to repeat a tone, you don't have to release the key entirely in order that the hammer be re-engaged. This is tremendously important to know when you are playing a trill, for instance.[...]
The issue under discussion is not how different pianists use different techniques to control the sound of the piano, it is what in that sound can actually be influenced by the pianist. Different pianists will use all sorts of different muscular motions; what we are discussing here is how the piano reacts to what they do.Once you are holding the pedal down, it makes no difference at all how long the key stays depressed. Hold down the pedal and play a phrase: you have no control of the length of the notes, their rate of decay is determined by the instrument. The only thing you can control is the shape of the phrase: the dynamic relationships between each successive note. If you give a melody an expressive contour by judicious variations of intensity and timing, it will sound more "legato" than if you play each note with the same intensity, in strict time.8_octaves goes into more detail on this particular subject in his last post above.Some people like the sound of this piano, some people prefer the sound of that piano. That has nothing to do with what we are discussing here.This is not standard practice, it's something that a few piano technicians like doing, without being clear about what they are actually achieving. They listen to the sound that the shank makes when dropped and give the shanks with the lowest sound to the lowest notes. Other things being equal, a shank that has a lower natural frequency will be more flexible than one with a higher one. In assigning the most flexible shanks to the lowest notes, all the technician has achieved is to make these notes slightly less predictable and slightly weaker.I strongly suspect that the major manufacturers have better things to do with their time.As already stated, the more flexible the hammer, the more unpredictable. We can do all sorts of things with the acceleration of the key, changing the way the hammer moves before it leaves the escapement, but once it leaves the escapement all that is left to it is this:- its momentum, which can no longer be influenced by the pianist- possible vibrations caused by flexing of the shankThe 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.)There are many theories of piano technique, yes, but we are not discussing their particular merits here. We are asking the question "is there a way to play a note twice at exactly the same volume, on the same piano, but with a difference in timbre?". This isn't a matter of taste, it's a case where an objective yes/no answer is possible.
Rehi michael_sayers,at the point of escapement, the hammer has a certain velocity / speed.. . .If something has "escaped", it means just that. We cannot control it, because we don't have it.Very cordially, 8_octaves!!
And what quality, velocity at escape aside, do you suggest one might affect?
Unfortunately I don't know precisely the terminology one would use to describe these other qualities. Pianists who can do this do it unconsciously.
It is not a question, though, of what they might do, or think they do - what property other than velocity is possibly imparted? Even on a NY Steinway D?
Hi j_menz,Horowitz, I think, talked a bit about his ability to control piano tone.And there are things in the writings of Claude Debussy about the application of this he wants with his piano music, and with the specific techniques for how it is to be done.Mvh,Michael
Horowitz notoriously talked a lot of rubbish. I've stated earlier in this thread how I believe it's done, and how it seems to be some mysterious art. It is, however, all just velocity.
But Josef Hofmann from the 1930s, whose massive sound is just like turning up a volume knob on a stereo and without diminution in tone quality, is an exception to this. He didn't do it by magic, but through his superior technique.Listen here, and especially to the fortissimo playing:
To me it is a settled question that the timbre of a grand piano can be made to vary at a specific level of dynamic. We can continue to discuss it, yet this will not alter the things I have experienced with my ears and outside of the various studies. I have heard to much, seen too much, and experienced too much, to be swayed.
[...]Unfortunately I don't know precisely the terminology one would use to describe these other qualities. Pianists who can do this do it unconsciously. [...]There are other pianists who, I suspect, have this ability.Mvh,Michael
[...] it is far too complicated for the minimalistic pronouncements in some of the posts in this thread.Mvh,Michael
[...]Claude Debussy about the application of this he wants with his piano music, and with the specific techniques for how it is to be done.Mvh,Michael
There is velocity, acceleration, motion, multiple planes and even topographies of motion, dynamics of motion . . . the particular materials and their properties as produced in their particular forms and configurations . . . it is far too complicated for the minimalistic pronouncements in some of the posts in this thread.
[...]Yet some of you don't believe, in spite of my scientific explanations, that we can't change the quality of a piano tone without changing its intensity, or that we can't influence a tone after it has been produced. Excuse me if I underestimate your knowledge. [ ] I don't underestimate your talent, but experience has taught me how few pianists know about their instrument. [...]All our piano destiny hangs on this downward movement of the key. It is essential to know everything about this three-eighths of an inch if we expect to master the instrument. There are actually three ways to produce a piano tone--through the "upper floor," or the "lower floor," as I have shown, or through both floors at once. The upper floor produces a very soft and light sound; you are familiar with its use in playing a glissando pp. This will not, of course, be suitable for playing a melody; it is a fairly unreliable tone and will not carry. Now, lower floor playing is very important in several cases. First, as I already mentioned, there is the trill. If you can always see the wood of the neighboring keys of those involved, it means you are not releasing them entirely, but going through a very short distance; hence, there is greater speed.Then, there are fast repeated notes; here, too, it is better to catch the key before it is up. The lower floor is also a good thing for super legato playing. Of course, it's not quite the same thing; as soon we play a new key, we have to start from the top of it. But if one must repeat a note or return to it, I wouldn't release it entirely either. This makes it possible to play the SAME note legato without pedal. That's a FINESSE, but very important to know, since often it's better not to use much help from pedals.Now there's the iron frame. It's good that it is strong, because it must sustain a tremendous tension. All the strings go through bridges connected to the sounding board, so all their vibrations are communicated to the sounding board and amplified by it.The tone that you hear when I play a single note is really quite complex. It consists not only of the fundamental tone, but also of a number of partials, of which I have already spoken.Acoustics is a very old science; in ancient Egypt and China they knew a great deal about it, but unfortunately much of the information has been lost. The first person whose works on acoustics have come down to us was the Greek philosopher Pythagoras.It was he who discovered that if a whole string vibrates, then also half of it vibrates, then consecutively a third, a quarter, a fifth, and so on, each independently. [...]The pitch of a tone varies inversely with the square root of the diameter; leaving this square root in peace, we can say, simply, the thicker the string the lower the tone.Also, the thicker the string, the poorer the quality of the tone, since there are fewer partials. That is why a nine foot grand is so much better than a baby grand. This will not influence your playing, but it will influence your buying. Unfortunately, the size of pianos, speaking scientifically, is in direct proportion to the price.As I have said, too many partials make a tone harsh. That is the reason why a loud tone is sometimes unpleasant--NOT because I have a bad touch. And of course, too few partials create a weak sound. It is the partials which change the "color" of a tone; therefore, this "color" you influence simply by playing softer or louder. ( Partials are often called harmonics. Actually, harmonics are sympathetic vibrations of OTHER strings. ) [...]Now to a very pleasant subject -- the pedals. They ARE wonderful, but at the same time a dangerous weapon, since they are often used to hide a multitude of sins. Now I speak of the damper pedal especially, this right foot pedal, which frees the strings from the dampers and allows them to continue vibrating, separately AND sympathetically. When I play this C without pedal I make only three strings vibrate; when I use pedal the whole piano vibrates. So you see the tremendous coloring possibilities of the pedal which exist ALONG with its help in legato.[...]
@ Debussy "how it is to be done" : So, then, Debussy could influence the movement of the hammer after the point of escapement? And then, after a tone has started, he was able to influence its color during its sound ? I don't think so, unless he would be able to achieve that by sheer force of his will... Cordially, 8_octaves.
acceleration: no, as soon as the hammer has left the escapement we cannot accelerate it. From this moment, until it hits the string, it is only subject to the weak acceleration force of gravity which is unchangeable.
There is no acceleration past the point of release - only deceleration an that is outside a pianists control.
Maybe you, michael_c and j_menz are just having a bit of fun with me here? Mvh,Michael
Hi michael_c,Here again (as was just posted to 8_octaves), who is it that has said one can accelerate a hammer after it has left the escapement?I know of no one who has said such a thing. Do you have a source for thinking otherwise, or are you all just messing around with me?
No, I was taking it directly from what you said in this post, which was in reply to j_menz's question about what properties could be imparted to the hammer:It doesn't matter how you accelerate the hammer: once you've stopped accelerating it, all that is left is the velocity. It doesn't remember how it got there.
Hi Michael_sayers,You asked me for proof that hammers after the point of escapement cannot be influenced.The proof is a ) laws of physics, b ) the research of the teacher I quoted, c ) reasonable thinking, and that not only from me, but from others here, too.Cordially, 8_octaves!
Hi michael_c,In the quoted passage of yours truly, which I reproduce below, where does it say that acceleration continues after the escapement?"There is velocity, acceleration, motion, multiple planes and even topographies of motion, dynamics of motion . . ."I don't see it anywhere between the quotes.
It's you that are messing with us. What you just quoted was your direct response to j_menz's question: what properties can be imparted to the hammer. The only one of those properties that can be imparted to the hammer is velocity.
Hi michael_c,I am not messing with anyone at all, I misread your post. Sorry about that.Do you have a source for the claim:"The only one of those properties that can be imparted to the hammer is velocity" . . . ?
Yes, Newton's laws of motion.
[...]Therefore, to avoid wasting time, argue as much as you like with me, but don't argue with Newton.[...]
Hi michael_c,How very strange, because this is one of my sources as well!Maybe you are working off of a different edition, or a different translation, or something?
The relevant law is F = MA. A body only accelerates when there is a force acting on it. It doesn't matter how you accelerate the hammer to a certain velocity: the force can be more over less time, or less over more time, or increasing or decreasing over time. Once there is no longer any force exerted upon the hammer, all that is left is the velocity.
Unlike in a piano action, the tangent does not rebound from the string; rather, it stays in contact with the string as long as the key is held, acting as both the nut and as the initiator of sound. The volume of the note can be changed by striking harder or softer, and the pitch can also be affected by varying the force of the tangent against the string (known as Bebung). When the key is released, the tangent loses contact with the string and the vibration of the string is silenced by strips of damping cloth.
It doesn't matter how you accelerate the hammer to a certain velocity . . .
. . . and on its way to the strings, the hammer cannot get additional force.
Very right, michael_c. What is left, is the velocity, which decreases ( also by physical laws ), and on its way to the strings, the hammer cannot get additional force.
Do you have a source for that information? This is where we need to get away from citing Newton who did not write anything explicitly about grand pianos.
That information can be found in any standard textbook on classical mechanics. It doesn't matter how any object is accelerated up to a certain velocity: once the accelerating force is no longer there, the object simply continues with the same velocity. This is as true for a piano hammer as it is for a rock. So it doesn't matter that Newton didn't write anything explicitly about grand pianos. A grand piano is still subject to the laws of mechanics.
I've studied mechanics but not with a textbook that had a chapter on grand piano tone production. What book title, edition, et c., are you referring to?
A body can only be accelerating when there is a force acting on it. Do you agree, or not?
Hi michael_c,I don't agree at all and this is because motion is relative. Maybe there is a mechanical engineering or a philosophy forum that this thread can be moved to?Mvh,Michael
I don't agree at all and this is because motion is relative. Maybe there is a mechanical engineering or a philosophy forum that this thread can be moved to?
As a result of its invariance under the Galilean transformations, acceleration is an absolute quantity in classical mechanics.
Topic: Does 'tone' really exist?! 