WHY WE ARE ALL DEAF TO CERTAIN SOUNDS AND WHY MANY ARE "MUSIC DEAF."

  

Whether or not you have a "musical ear" you can not detect a sound unless it lasts more than one-fortieth of a second, no matter how loud it may be, although practice may enable the ear to catch a still shorter one. There are many sounds that the ear can not detect, so scientists tell us, while the less exact and more imaginative persons call these undetected notes indications of "divine harmonies." 

Some ears are more acutely attuned than others and can pick out these ordinarily "inaudible sounds," just as some eyes can see colors that are invisible to other eyes. Which brings us to a realization of what a wonderful apparatus the human ear is, and the interesting process through which sound vibrations go in being taken into our consciousness, bringing their story of human emotions, or jarring dissonances and of exquisite harmonies!

Some ears have no affinity for music—they are blind to harmony, so to speak—while others seem created for the appreciative reception of music. And, says an English observer, the musical ear and the unmusical ear are easily recognized and classified by the external formation. It is not necessary to study the artistic tastes of friends to discover whether they have an ear for music, says the aural savant. The shape of the ear clearly indicates a musical temperament and shows whether one has a taste or talent for music. 

There is a musical ear and an unmusical ear. The contour of the musical ear shows symmetry and grace in curvature. It is also inclined to be broadly rounded at the top with an evenly-defined rim. It is generally placed forward and outward, instead of flat against the head. Musicians have ears of this type with a tendency to broadness across the center and top. Singers generally have ears of similar outline, but long and narrow. 

The unmusical ear is angular in shape, inclining to a sharp point at the top as well as at the lobe. This point is brought to our attention by Newberry 0. Norwood, American observer of men and things, who declares that the evangelist, "Billy" Sunday, has just such an ear, the sharp-pointed top of which is evident in all his photographs facing the camera and those snapped at three-quarter face. 

"Satyr-point," is the way Mr. Norwood characterizes it, but whether the ear of the redoubtable revivalist is musical or not, it might be indiscreet to venture a guess, for Mr. Sunday is entirely able to speak for himself. But if you ever have an opportunity to see him at close range and note that the interior of the ear is sharply defined and more or less irregular in line— then you will know that he has another character classified as the unmusical ear by the English expert, who, furthermore, declares that any ear that is poorly formed, irregular and ugly in appearance indicates a lack of musical taste and ability on the part of the possessor. 

The unmusical ear, therefore, is less likely to detect the elusive sounds in the air. "Vibratory disturbances" is the technical classification ; for whether those that can not be heard should be called "sounds" is perhaps debatable. But, at any rate, they differ in sounds in no respect except that they do not affect the ear. Recent experimenters find that both the number of vibrations and the duration of the sound influence its audibility—probably the latter more than the former. Apparently no ordinary sound can be heard unless it lasts longer than one-fortieth of a second, no matter how loud it may be, although practice may enable the ear to catch one that is still shorter. 

A French writer draws attention to the fact that Savart, in 1830, attempted to find out whether a very small number of successive vibrations, or even a single vibration, would be sufficient to produce a recognizable sound. Others after him took up the same question, but all do not agree. Some assert that a considerable number of vibrations is necessary, while others say that even a fraction of a period is sufficient. It is generally acknowledged, however, by those who have examined all the evidence that two complete vibrations suffice to identify a sound. 

Dr. Gianfrancheschi, who has been investigating the graphic trace of the vowels, has taken up the problem, using the differential interrupter of Blaserna. This is a very simple apparatus —a cylinder, partly covered with a conducting layer on which rubs a contact. If the cylinder be made to rotate regularly and the contact be moved from left to right, the electric circuit will be closed for a shorter and shorter time. The sound is produced near a microphone, situated near the interrupting cylinder. The operator who identifies the sound listens at a telephone in a distant room. 

The results of numerous experiments show that the number of vibrations necessary to enable a sound to be heard is not constant; it varies from two to forty or more. What is constant is rather the duration of the sound, which must be at least one-fortieth of a second in order that the sound may be identified. 

This is apparently the smallest time required by the auditory organs to adapt themselves to a sound that strikes them. This period constitutes a sort of physiological constant. Dr. Gianfrancheschi, however, was able to recognize certain sounds of much shorter duration—less than a hundredth of a second, but it should be said that these sounds were very familiar ones, such as the voice of a singer who had assisted him for several years in his studies of the vowel sounds. In this case his ear had become habituated by practice to recognize a given sound more quickly. 

When sung by another voice the same sounds required for identification a longer time, of the usual order of magnitude. It should also be said that the Blaserna interrupter, running at five to six revolutions per second, makes a noise at each revolution, and a repetition of this kind is naturally capable of facilitating greatly the identification of the note.—1915 Cincinnati Commercial Tribune.

What Material is Best for Wrapping Bass Strings?

 

"The relative densities of the wrapping material employed in the manufacture of bass strings have been the subject of considerable study. Brass, which was the earliest object of experiment, has long been superseded by either copper or iron. As to the relative advantages possessed by these two materials, it can be said at once that the chief and almost the only advantage presented by the latter lies in its relative cheapness. Acoustically, however, copper forms by all means the most suitable material for the winding of bass strings, and this for the following reasons : The specific gravity of copper is 8.78, while that of iron is but 7.78. Again, the former metal while inferior in tenacity to the latter, possesses, on the other hand, the great advantage of higher ductility, so that its elastic qualities are very marked. It is thus evident that copper is a more suitable material for the generation of musical sound than is iron and the qualities which we have just noted as pertaining to it are precisely those most useful in the production of harmonic progressions of partial tones. It is, therefore, clear that as between copper and iron all the advantages lie with the former."—Theory and Practice of Pianoforte Building by Samuel Wolfenden.

Dolge and Soundboards (of which he manufactured many)

 THE SOUNDBOARD. 

An Extract from "Pianos and Their Makers." By Alfred Dolge. 

The science of acoustics as developed by Chladny, Tyndall, Helmholtz, and in its direct relation to the piano, especially by Siegfried Hansing, has given us much enlightenment as to the proper and correct laying out of a scale, also the laws controlling the production of sound by percussion and otherwise, but none of these scientists can advise as to the scientifically correct construction of the soundboard. The much coddled theory of "tone waves" found its, most obstinate opponent in the soundboard of the pianoforte, disproving forcibly almost every argument brought forward in favor of this theory. Not finding any assistance from scientists, the piano maker had to rely entirely upon empiric experiments, to construct a soundboard best adapted to his scale. All the experiments, and their names are legion, ended in coming back to the plain soundboard as constructed by the clavichord and harpsichord makers of the early days, namely, made of the best quality of well-seasoned fir, strengthened by bars or ribs glued on crossways. The various writers on piano construction differ materially regarding the importance of the soundboard in relation to tone development in the piano. The careful and learned Dr. Oscar Paul, laboring under the ban of the "wave theory," insists that the soundboard is the very soul of the piano and that tone quality as well as volume depend altogether upon its construction. Indeed, he holds that the tone is produced by the soundboard and not by the string. 

Siegfried Hansing in his book, "The Pianoforte and Its Acoustic Properties," shows the fallacy of this contention beyond contradiction. He bases his argument on Pellisow's proven doctrine that the ear does not perceive sound thru so-called tone waves, but because of the shock or jolt by which the sound is created. Consequently, Hansing looks upon the soundboard as a drum, upon which the vibrations of the strings, caused by the striking of the hammer, are delivered as shocks or jolts. 

Hansing disclaims the existence of the ear harp, assumed by Helmholtz and others, as an impossibility and maintains that the ear is an apparatus to measure the intervals between shocks, distinguishing the higher tones by their shorter, and the lower tones by their longer, intervals. He does not believe that a properly constructed soundboard has any transverse vibrations which affect the tone, as demonstrated by the successful experiments of Mathushek and Moser, whose double soundboards were glued together so that the grain of the one crossed the grain of the other at right angles. This method of construction makes any transverse vibration impossible, and instruments containing such boards are not inferior in volume and quality of tone to any other. 

Hansing thus proves that the soundboard does not give forth sounds, but that it only augments and transmits the sound originating with the string, thru a tremor, which is the effect of the motion producing the sound ; namely the percussion of the string by the hammer. This important discovery will assist materially in the further search for soundboard improvements, but even Hansing admits that for the present the piano constructor has to rely on empiric experiments for final results. 

To mention a few of the most telling experiments made to improve the efficiency of the soundboard we find Jacob Goll, of Vienna, using iron and copper with reasonable success in 1823; but, no doubt the primitive conditions of the metal industries of those days made the use of metal too expensive, as compared to wood. Henri Pape, of Paris, that king of piano empirics, experimented not only with all kinds of wood and metal, but even tried parchment. All these materials transmitted the sound of the strings, except the parchment, which proved totally unfit for use in the treble sections. 

During the writer's engagement with the Mathushek factory in 1867-69 exhaustive experiments were made to find the most responsive thickness for a soundboard. With boards from fully one inch in thickness, without ribs, graduated down to boards only three-sixteenths of an inch thick in treble, and with proportionally heavy ribs, numberless tests were made. Curious to relate, all of the pianos had a satisfactory tone, differing, of course, in quality. The thick boards responded with a thick, somewhat stiff, woody quality, the pianos with the thinner boards had a more sympathetic, soulful, but weaker tone. The most satisfactory tone quality was found in the pianos which had the "regulation" soundboard, three-eighths of an inch thick in treble, tapering off to one-fourth of an inch in bass, ribs placed at nearly equal distances apart, except in the last treble octave, where they lay somewhat closer together. These trials and tests proved conclusively that the soundboard does not produce sound by aid of sound waves, but simply transmits and augments the sound produced by the vibration of the string. They further proved that the soundboard is not nearly as much of a factor in tone production as the string, the proper length, thickness and position of which, together with the most advantageous striking point for the hammer, are the all-important factors to be considered in piano construction. 

Attempts to increase the volume of tone by using double soundboards, connected by wooden posts or otherwise, the imitation of the violin or cello form, carefully worked out corrugated soundboards, etc., have all been in vain and are discarded for good. Several ingenious devices to sustain the resistance of the soundboard against the downward pressure of the strings are recorded. Among them Mathushek's "equilibre" system, patented in 1879, is perhaps the most scientific, but the result achieved is not in proportion to the increased cost. Mathushek surmised, what Hansing established as a scientific fact, that the soundboard is not affected by so-called sound waves, and when he discarded his equilibre system because of its high cost, he returned to the thick soundboard without ribs. In 1891 he patented his duplex soundboard, which is a combination of two boards, cross-banded and glued together. The boards are made thickest at the center where the bridge rests, in order to withstand the pressure of the strings. 

On October 2, 1900, Richard W. Gertz obtained a patent for a tension resonator for pianos, the purport of which is to regulate the pressure in the arch of the soundboard against the strings and to assist the vibratory efficiency of the entire soundboard, thereby increasing the intensity of the tone produced by the striking of the hammer against the string. 

Another function of this resonator is to restore the original arched form of the soundboard when, through age or atmospheric influences, the same has given away to the pressure of the strings. The tension rods with the conical shaped head, inserted into the rim, draw together the entire rim upon which the soundboard is fastened, and force the latter back to its original arched form, reinstating and enlivening the vibratory action of the entire board. 

Radiating from the center of the piano to all parts of the rim the tension rods can be screwed up, either simultaneously to bring pressure upon the entire board, or individually if any part of the soundboard should show a pronounced flatness. They are furthermore of great value in maintaining the correct form and shape of the rim. This invention has been applied to all the grand pianos made by Mason & Hamlin since the granting of the patent. 

Experience so far has shown that the best material for soundboards is the wood of the fir tree, growing in the mountain regions of Southern Europe and North America. 

Whether or not the development of the steel industry will furnish the piano maker eventually with rolled sheets for soundboards, made of proper vibratory metal, and in tapered form, is speculative. It is not improbable, however, that the piano of the future may have a metal soundboard. We do know that the sound in the piano originates with the steel string, and that it is only transmitted by the soundboard, materially assisted by proper construction of the wooden frame of the piano. We also know that the iron frame has no deleterious influence upon the tone quality, and since all piano constructors are still seeking for a clear, bell-like, singing quality of tone, may not the solution be found in a soundboard of steel, so constructed as to successfully withstand the pressure of the strings, and to assist the steel strings in tone production? 

Evidently the soundboard is the only part of the modern piano which calls upon the inventor for further investigation, on scientific lines, until the laws are found upon which to build a piano, not necessarily with a louder, but with a more soulful tone, such as the old clavichord possessed in limited quantity.

 Alfred Dolge, 1892:

"There is no doubt in my mind that manufacturers will eventually make all their employees partners in the business, as there is undoubtably (sic) something wrong at present in the relation of capital to labor. In many instances capitalists enrich themselves immeasurably at the expense of labor. It would certainly be welcomed by the majority of the American people if a plan could be derived, just for both sides, whereby labor will get its rightful proportion of the earnings of the business."

It is likely that this attitude won him no friends amongst the bankers.

Steinway's Teflon Bushings

                                                    



The Steinway Teflon bushing has gotten a lot of bad press through the years, and although some of that is deserved, I think the time and effort Steinway put into it is not well known.

Theodore D. Steinway was the chief engineer at Steinway during the time of the development of the Teflon bushing (during the first three years of the decade of the '60's), and was in charge of all the research and development in design, methods and materials of piano construction. The impetus of this development of using Teflon for centers stemmed from the comparative expense and complications that the cloth bushed parts posed to the manufacturer. Tight controls and highly skilled personnel were among the things required to properly manufacture these cloth bushed parts, adding time and expense for the maker.

Theodore D. earned a B.A. from Harvard in 1935 and worked at Steinway & Sons since 1935 starting with a three year apprenticeship at the factory. During WWII he served in Army Intelligence in the Pacific and rose to the rank of Major before his release after which he returned to the factory. Theodore and his team began working on this idea in the late 1950's. They came upon the idea of a one piece bushing made of TFE fluorocarbon resin known to us as Teflon, and dubbed by its creators, the permafree bushing.

They tested these bushings over more than 8 million cycles which they figured equated to 40 years of hard playing and found no appreciable change in performance. They did test other materials which they found to have fair results, such as polyethylene, vinyls, nylon and rubber, but found Teflon to be somewhat superior to those.

Hygroscopic properties of Teflon are practically zero, as its moisture absorption was found to be less than 0.01%, in contrast to the 8% moisture picked up by the wool cloth bushings, when relative humidity changes from 25 to 75%. In the comparative trials in the high humidity environment, centers equipped with Teflon bushings required 7% more force to play the keys, due almost exclusively to the wood and not the Teflon, where cloth centers required 65% more force, and at times failed to function due to tightness.

In trials dealing with low humidity, the Teflon lost 8% of the effort needed to play the keys but were still firm and solid. The cloth bushings lost 16% and wobbliness was evident in many cases. Excessive looseness results in squeaks and noises, and in inaccurate alignment of hammers, inefficient control and poor operation of the keys.

Now the main complaint with Teflon bushed parts these days and in days not long past are that they distort due to the wood surrounding them, much more than the above tests indicated. With high humidity, the bushings would click and become somewhat loose, whereas their tests with high humidity netted no such results, probably due to the fact that the high humidity test was of relatively short duration, because prolonged humidity rise and fall through many years does eventually result in loose bushings in high humidity. In a dry atmosphere the opposite eventually happens, again, not immediately, but in time, where the centers become tight.

Steinway used to send their technical people out to teach piano technicians how to fix these things. I don't think they thought they would be as much of a problem as they turned out to be. I remember taking a Teflon class from Fred Drasche at the 1980 Piano Technicians Guild annual Convention in Philadelphia. I remember learning how easy it was to fix and how to replace the bushings and how to ream them with specialized reamers and center pins. One thing to remember was when re-pinning Teflon bushed parts, we were to pin the parts a bit looser than done with cloth bushed parts, but not too loose where they would click. It was a more precise effort and required acquiring experience to accurately do the work.

DECKER & SON vs. DECKER BROS. circa 1880's

“I THINK," said Mr. Myron A. Decker, the head of the well-known house

of Decker & Son, piano manufacturers of New York City, "that more persistent

and malicious efforts are made to persecute me than, any man in the

trade I know of."

It was while a reporter of the MUSICAL PIANO AND TRADE BEVIEW was

sitting in Mr. Decker's office, just before the examination of the "Baby"

Grand spoken of in our last issue, that the above remark was made.

“Here, as you know," continued Mr. Decker, " I have been manufacturing

pianos for about twenty-five years, and yet some of my rivals would like

to take from me the right to use my own name, and if possible to run me out

of the business. I know very well that I make a thoroughly good piano, a

great deal better piano than many others make, and I suppose it is the quality

of my goods that hurts them."

" Yes," replied the reporter, " you certainly do make an excellent piano.

But if your enemies trouble you, why don't you fight ? Your piano is good

enough, but there is one thing that should be combined with it."

"And that is," said Mr. Decker.

"Aggressiveness," replied the reporter. "If, as you say, parties are

trying to walk all over you, you should strike out straight from the

shoulder."

Mr. Decker smiled at this point as if he had his share of aggressiveness,

and was prepared to make use of it at the right time.

“The feeling extends," he continued, "even to agents and dealers,

rivals of my agents and dealers, all over the country; it has grown so that it

is difficult to keep track of it, and it has become so common that I should

have my hands about full to attend to it. I think it will be a good idea to

take some one person, and make an example of him that will frighten the

others. Some of my manufacturing rivals having started the ' fraud ' cry,

it has been taken up by dealers, who find it very convenient, I suppose,

when my pianos come in competition with those they handle, to take up the

howl of ' bogus, bogus!' "

“Here is one way in which the thing is worked," and Mr. Decker handed

the reporter a slip cut from the Montreal Herald and Daily Commercial

Gazette, dated Saturday, June 18th, 1881, which read as follows:

“PERSONAL.—We have had the pleasure of a visit from Mr. Myron A. Decker, of the well-known firm of Decker & Son, piano manufacturers, New

York. Mr. Decker visits our city in the interests of his business, and, we

understand, has established his agency at the extensive house of the N. Y.

Piano Company, 226 and 228 St. James Street. Mr. Decker is one of the

oldest and most respectable piano manufacturers in America, having worked

at the bench with the celebrated Albert Weber over thirty years ago. His

instruments have the endorsement of the leading musicians of the country,

and are as handsome in style as they are sweet and beautiful in tone."

When the reporter had read the above, Mr. Decker said, " It is strange,

is it not, that after my arrival in Montreal to place an agency there, this

little paragraph should turn up, and in the same issue of the paper that the

above appeared in ? “and Mr. Decker handed the reporter another slip of

paper on which he read:

BEWARE of bogus "Decker" Pianos. DECKER BROS., of Union Square,

New York, are alone entitled to the trademark, "THE DECKER," and De-

Zouche & Co. are the sole agents.

“Curious coincidence that, isn't it? Possibly some of them will say, if

the cap fits me I may wear it. But that's nonsense, I know what the thing

amounts to, and I don't hesitate to put the matter before you."

“Now here is another phase of the question: let me read you a part of

a letter which is similar to thousands I receive. It is from John A. Gilbert,

my agent in Crawfordsville, Ind. He writes me to send him one of my best

uprights for exhibition at some fair in the West, and says:

‘I want to take the rag from my competitors who claim that the piano

you make is bogus, and a base imitation of the genuine. Their denunciations

are loud and deep. They say that you are counterfeiters, and make a third-class

instrument. Told all this to the party to whom I sold my initial

Decker & Son piano; called it a cheap, snide thing. They have one Weber,

Emerson and Kimball."

“Now what would you do to such fellows as those he speaks of," asked

Mr. Decker.

“Do," repeated the reporter, " Why the first thing I should do would

be to get my batteries perfectly in order before opening fire on them."

Who was Adam Weishaupt?

Adam Weishaupt was born February 6, 1748 of Jewish parents but grew up in the Catholic faith. When his father, George Weishaupt, died in 1754, Adam was adopted by a fellow professor named Baron Ickstatt who was curator of the university of Ingolstadt in Bavaria, and was forced into formal indoctrination of Jesuit ideals of Catholic global Luciferianism at the age of seven.

He graduated from the University of Ingolstadt in 1768, and was made a tutor and catechist. In 1772 he was made a professor of Law. He was initiated as a Freemason in 1774 in Germany, but found that no one in his order truly understood the occult significance of the ceremonies. He decided to found his own organization, which he did on the first of May 1776. This organization was first known as "The Order of Perfectibilists" but became famous as the Illuminati for short. Only five people were present at the first meeting of the order, but it grew rapidly and only a few years later it had chapters all over Germany, Austria, France, Italy, Hungaria and Switzerland. Weishaupt and his co-conspirators, notably Baron Knigge and a lawyer named Zwack, had soon established a network of agents around Europe that infiltrated courts and other places of power and reported back useful gossip and information to Weishaupt. The Illuminati's true goals were shrouded in mystery. Because of Weishaupt´s strong anti-clerical and anti-royalist views, some have assumed that the Illuminati were some sort of communistic organization dedicated to bringing about a proletarian revolution. (taken from http://home.swipnet.se/~w-40977/coolpeople/weishaupt.html)

Here is a revealing quote by Weisaupt on the Illuminati: 

"The great strength of our Order lies in it's concealment, let it never appear in any place in it's own name, but always covered by another name, and another occupation.  None is fitter than the three lower degrees of Freemasonry, the public is accustomed to it, expects little from it, and therefore takes little notice of it.  Next to this, the form of a learned or literary society is best suited to our purpose, and had Freemasonry not existed, this cover would have been employed; and it may be much more than a cover, it may be a powerful engine in our hands.  By establishing Reading Societies, and subscription libraries, and taking these under our direction, and supplying them through our labours, we may turn the public mind which way we will."

To further illuminate, a book by Weishaupt, originally published in German in 1804:

Diogenes' Lamp; or, An Examination of Our Present-Day Morality and Enlightenment