Help Tuning a Ping Putter's "Ping"

AFAIK all silver solder is mostly copper...sterling is .925 silver....the BeCu is mostly copper with 2% beryllium....

No, you're missing the point entirely.

Joining thin components of wind instruments bears no resemblance to altering the frequency response of a percussion instrument.

Well silver solder is mostly copper , Silvaloy for instance is 15% silver and 80% copper with 5% phosphorus...but most are 5 - 6% silver....some cymbals use 12% nickel(4970 m/s) with copper....called nickel silver....8:09

Don't make me regret starting this thread!

I ask you what time it is and you tell me how to build a watch?

Let's keep it simple.

OK but we still don't have all the measurements of the putter head,,,and slots....If you're not going to solder or braze(sic) the slots up a bit , how do you plan to alter the pitch of the ping?

I probably could compile that data, but what on earth would anyone do with it?

I'll file this with the request for:

(1) Brinnell Hardness?

(2) elasticity?

(3) Sonic transmission, speed of sound

(4) density

(5) scratch test

(6) golf ball test - how many times can you bounce a golf ball on the putter face.

(7) balance test

I'm not sure how, or if, I will alter the frequency.

The whole idea of the putter is to make a sound the practiced golfer will recognize as a ball strike in the center of mass, or zero moment part of the putter head, so that his putting will be on target with whatever line he sees as the target line.

I do not think a complex sound as this will tell you anything when over-analyzed.

Have you ever used a Ping 1-A putter?

Yes, but only borrowed. Others have explained to me how it is supposed to work. If you putt, for example, on the toe of the club, the tone will be "muddy". If the ball is stroked correctly, the distinctive "ping" is easily heard.

Well, if she lets me borrow hers, I'll run some tests and see if the analyzer can tell the difference.

As I recall, all of my putts sounded turn and crisp.

Well there might be a reason why people found the pitch of the ping to be so desirable, it could be the whole reason for the success of this company, a putter that sang out in a perfect E7 when perfection was achieved....maybe it's Pavlovian in nature....maybe E7 triggers the release of a hormone....I think a government grant to study these phenomena is in order....

OMG, ROFLMAO twice in a row!

During the daylight savings clock adjustment period, put the back of the clock over an open box freezer and aim an infrared area heater at the front....

The pitch of wind instruments is governed by the length of the resonant air column. The materials they're made of may affect the timbre but not the pitch. I reckon two identical trombones, one made of silver vs one of brass, would probably sound nearly identical.

James Stewart, I have no regrets about lengthening the slots. It's a $100 putter and I don't sell any golf clubs.

That also made no discernible difference in the pitch. (Still dumb of me to go the wrong way) Must have been after the sun was over the foreyard.

SE, I agree with dkwarner that solder is not the answer, nor brazing and my mind cannot wrap itself around torching a club. Besides if the face springs inward it becomes a nonconforming club. _{^{(Like I care)}}

I do know that there are still a few body men who can perform miracles with a torch, but that ain't me.

So, in my haste to leave work, I left the putter there.

No more till tomorrow.

This is a fascinating ongoing story and well done for keeping us all up to date.

Thanks. I've got a project that is demanding all of my time today, so far the twin screws only dampen the ping.

The nuts have a tendency to "roll" up the putter sides. I may try C-clamping them in place to get them tight.

I'd also like to develop a "sound box" to use for testing that will give somewhat repeatable results.

More later.

This is what the spectrum looks like with the tuning bar (10-32 screw and nuts) centered on the putter head. (Somewhat muffled)

This is the video SE posted of the ping sound.

This is the unrestricted sound of my putter.

I have reached a very firm conclusion that these don't tell me anything.

Tuning bar moved to the front of the head.

I've discovered that the striking force is not consistent and that influences the results. In order to produce repeatable results I must come up with a striker and some type of setup that allows repeatability.

You need to mount a golf ball on a pendulum....

Yes, many years ago I had occasion to witness impact testing of many items and those tests employed a pendulum mounted weight.

I may just drop the balls from a shelf or other fixed surface.

This is starting to get complicated and I don't have room for it. Maybe I can set something up at work. My boss is a golfer and I am a short timer.

Latest results with ball on carpet and struck with putter, average of 5 strokes.

Ball struck on heel of putter, 2234 hz.

Ball struck close to middle, middle and toe all 2788 hz.

Abandoned the idea of fixturing in favor of using natural putting stroke.

Yes an F7 vs an E7....definitely too high....it's all wrong

http://www.szynalski.com/tone-generator/

GA! Thanks for that link!!

Right click and loop the video, then open the tone generator....by clicking on and off match the volume and tone of the ping....then post results....

"It's all wrong"?

What's all wrong?

Forget the musical notes, and stick to frequency.

You're comparing the tone of a video whose sound is being reproduced by your small pc speaker to the sound of a tone generated by that same small speaker and using your ear as the judge? Pretty subjective if you ask me. Not that you can't hear but everyone's hearing is different.

If you take a look at my spectra of the video sound compared to the spectra of the sound I produced by real time ball striking, you will see that the actual putting sound spectra is much more complex than the reproduced sound.

I'm going to rely on the sounds made in real time by my putter.

''...you will see that the actual putting sound spectra is much more complex than the reproduced sound..."

Of course, hacksawing an ad hoc asymmetrical groove to lengthen a vibrating member in an attempt to raise the pitch is going to make the putter sound more complex.

I do remember you insisting that the modifations you made with the hacksaw did not change the tone, but you shouldn't be critcal of others for relying on what their ears perceive, yet expect everyone to trust your evaluation by ear that hacking metal away resulted in zero change in tone as per your recently calibrated ear.

I've been tuning guitars for 40+ years....My computer speakers are 2-way 60 watt stereo with powered subwoofer and produces excellent sound quality....The tone you hear is what's important, at least according to you,,,isn't that why you started this thread? I think we need at least 2 other original ping A1 putters to do an apples to apples comparison on your spectrum analyzer...and without the spectrum of the original you had, we still don't know what we're after, other than your memory of the sound...If the hacking of the slots in the new putter did indeed lower the pitch of the ping, then I find it likely that the new putters are using a different methodology in producing the heads...and as a result perhaps even more slot hacking is required....possibly even from the exterior rather than the interior...perhaps beating it with a hammer may produce further complexity in the spectra and result in a lowering of the tonal dominance of undesirable effrontery...

No offense to you or your speakers.

The difference in pitch between the two, old and new, (according to my feeble memory) is significant.

The possibility of them using a different material is real and if you've never heard the original ping sound then there would be no need to question the sound of a newer model.

So, now we're left with your interpretation/analysis of the recorded sound of an original and my interpretation/analysis of the later model, perhaps in a different material.

I still plan to try and borrow the original Ping this week and I have a golf ball set-up ready to use in the tests.

I'm sure that at some time in my life I have heard the Ping A1 putter in all its glory, but alas it was not a memorable event, evidently....I have never owned one, which may account for the lack of impression....The old virgin Ping should tell the tale that will extricate us from this quagmire of sour notes....yet still no solution as to how you shall extract the sweet ping of glory from that newfangled chineesy copy...If I could be left alone in a room with it and a 4 lb sledge, I do believe I could massage the discordance from its soul....but I sense this is not to be.... Onward then, the game remains afoot...

I have already abandoned hope of tuning that hacked up Ping I bought at the pro shop and am now bidding on one (old model 1a) on ebay.

My friend is sick in hospital, I found out today, so her's will be out of play for a week or so till her hubby is less occupied.

I've got the test set up ready, not using a sound box (anechoic chamber) since my house is dead quiet before the kids get home.

I may visit some pro shops this weekend. Yard sales are a waste of time.

As in a tuning fork, the larger the tines the lower the pitch ( more mass in the tines ).

To draw a comparison to wind chimes, the shorter the tube the higher the pitch.

Applying the concept to the putter would imply that the length of the slots might not be as critical for pitch and tone than the mass of the outer strips. The material used ( BC ) also would have a different thickness for a given pitch; you might find that removing material would make the putting surfaces more prone to bending, not good if you want straight repeatable putts....