Mechanical Music Digest  Archives
You Are Not Logged In Login/Get New Account
Please Log In. Accounts are free!
Logged In users are granted additional features including a more current version of the Archives and a simplified process for submitting articles.
Home Archives Calendar Gallery Store Links Info

End-of-Summer Fundraising Drive In Progress. Please visit out home page to see this and other announcements: https://www.mmdigest.com     Thank you. --Jody

MMD > Archives > April 2001 > 2001.04.18 > 05Prev  Next


American and British Duo-Art Systems
By Julian Dyer

Ignoring the tone of previous responses, there is still a point at
issue here about the basic aims of rebuilding.  It's misleading to
interpret how machines 'ought' to work, because in reality we should
consider how they were meant to work by their designers.

For the Duo-Art, modern thoughts on the logarithmic aspects of sound
pressure tend to get superimposed on the original idea and confuse
matters.  Rolls were coded to sound right on editing pianos, and we
should try to reproduce that setting to make the rolls sound good now.
Any redesign or reinterpretation of the machine, no matter how much of
a genuine improvement, will harm the reproduction of original rolls.

Considering as we were the relative levels of theme and accompaniment,
I was trying to convey the idea that, given the Duo-Art practice of
coding theme dynamic levels equal or higher than accompaniment, the
least possible accent will be when a note is accented with equal theme
and accompaniment levels set.

Clearly this least possible accent needs to be relatively small to
permit subtle playing, and is the reason the Duo-Art manual calls for
'one degree' of difference, whatever that may mean in practice.  Making
the levels hugely different will erode subtlety, but will obviously
give greater maximum accenting.  I don't think it's of any consequence
how many 'f's you have in the crash if the piano-mezzoforte range is
unmusical.

I rather doubt that there's really much to choose between the variants
of Duo-Art expression box design.  I suspect that the London operation
never understood things as well as the original designers, and in one
or two aspects I suspect the design slipped in later years.  However,
as Paddy Handscombe has suggested, the effect of setting up the
expression springs, whether equal or different, probably comes to much
the same thing.

Sadly, not enough Duo-Arts work well enough to show the details we've
been considering.  Given the other dissertation on Duo-Art soft pedal
coding, maybe it's lucky Aeolian did as they did because there are one
or two instruments around where the soft pedal gives the only audible
change in dynamics!

Julian Dyer

 [ "Expression via the hammer lift" is remarkably effective, especially
 [ as used in European pianos and orchestrions.  I hope we can explore
 [ this topic someday in MMD.  -- Robbie


(Message sent Wed 18 Apr 2001, 11:38:48 GMT, from time zone GMT+0100.)

Key Words in Subject:  American, British, Duo-Art, Systems

Home    Archives    Calendar    Gallery    Store    Links    Info   


Enter text below to search the MMD Website with Google



CONTACT FORM: Click HERE to write to the editor, or to post a message about Mechanical Musical Instruments to the MMD

Unless otherwise noted, all opinions are those of the individual authors and may not represent those of the editors. Compilation copyright 1995-2019 by Jody Kravitz.

Please read our Republication Policy before copying information from or creating links to this web site.

Click HERE to contact the webmaster regarding problems with the website.

Please support publication of the MMD by donating online

Pay via PayPal

No PayPal account required

                                     
Translate This Page

. .