OOAK Table Tennis Forum

Not sure if this is allowed but I just found a very interesting thread on another forum that I thought worth sharing.

It's to do with the blade tone and how this reflects in the speed. I've long been a believer in this and have previously called it the plink/donk test.

Brett Clarke has suggested using a blade that has the same time as Viscaria regardless of cost ie $5 blade is fine. This set me on a search for ways to address this and found the thread below.

The thread is saying to download a frequency analyser app, bounce the ball I the bar blade and the reading tells you the tone of the blade and therefore the speed.

The has been a spreadsheet produced with all the comparative figures from various blades.

Under 1,000 is DEF
1000 - 1,100 ALL
1,100 - 1,250 ALL+
1,250 - 1,400 OFF-
1,400 - 1,600 OFF
1,600-. OFF+


I measured one blade, Yasaka Extra and it came in at 1,184.
Interestingly Sanwei M8 came in at 1,287 sneaking into OFF- range.

http://mytabletennis.net/forum/forum_po ... lade-speed

Here's the link to the database https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1tnzuhP98Iwl3_ZYIKs770Z4GeEXB1cPaF6xXC3IMLfg/edit?usp=sharing

Here's the form to submit your own value http://goo.gl/forms/HGki3A0DqfYSXT2A3

_________________
Donic Waldner Senso V1,FH Baracuda Big Slam 2.0mm ,BH Victas Triple Regular 2.0mm

Time or tone? And are the numbers you list in Hz, or some other unit? Which frequency analyzer did you download?

Yeah, I always thought the M8 was a hair faster than my Stiga Allround Classic.

Iskandar

How about you read the link rather than subcontracting your thinking to someone else?

The link says:

_________________
Yasaka Sweden Classic | 802 OX | C8 OX
Check out my blog - LordCope's Latest Learning Log - 10+ years of accumulate mistakes!

Ahem!

viewtopic.php?p=340912#p340912

_________________
Other setups:
SDC Custom Blade/Butterfly Dignics 80/Butterfly Glayzer
BTY Viscaria/Tibhar K3/Tibhar K3

Yes, darcula your recent comment inspired me to look further into this. Not the first time though. It was suggested a while back though that might have been you also. What I didn't know was that there was big database already established.

Note: Opening post updated with the link to the database and form to submit your own values.

_________________
Donic Waldner Senso V1,FH Baracuda Big Slam 2.0mm ,BH Victas Triple Regular 2.0mm

Yes I saw that as well, and did put some thought into at the time.

While I think there may be some value in comparing similar blades, I think the blade speed is just too complex to relate it just to it's fundamental vibration frequency.
As we know, blade speed varies with the impact power, as more of the inner plies come into action. So just using a single number to compare, is really no better than assigned a single speed value to a blade. I can also see exception in where this system falls down, an example would be balsa blades.
If you read the thread, you will also read that people have found values that don't make sense.

I think people like this idea, mainly because you can use your phone to measure it and anyone can do it.

I don't mean to be negative on this idea, it's just that I'm from a scientific background, and find that just because there is a correlation between blade speed and fundamental frequency, does not necessarily mean the frequency gives a useful measure of speed. No doubt it will work for many case, but there will also be many cases when it's not true, so how will you know if your blade is one of those cases?

_________________
OOAK Table Tennis Shop | Re-Impact Blades | Butterfly Table Tennis bats
Setup1: Re-Impact Smart, Viper OX, Victas VS 401 Setup2: Re-Impact Barath, Dtecs OX, TSP Triple Spin Chop 1.0mm Setup3: Re-Impact Dark Knight, Hellfire OX, 999 Turbo
Recent Articles: Butterfly Tenergy Alternatives | Tenergy Rubbers Compared | Re-Impact User Guide

Especially when you start adding composite materials and radically different woods into the mix.

(Although I'd argue, that composite materials would be more consistent sample to sample, and potentially more suitable for a this sort of thing, as there is overall a lower % of wood to mess things up...

_________________
Chasse Patate

I don't think that a blade should be chosen purely on the basis of its frequency. Heck, I used to work in the audio business, and I don't think that speakers should be chosen purely on the basis of frequency response either.

It is fun, and can be interesting, to check a bunch of blades, if you have them hanging around though. And it costs nothing. What does provide food for thought is that some heavier examples of blades have a lower tone than other examples of the same blade which weigh less, whereas with other blades lighter samples might have a lower tone. It could be fun to try to run some numbers to see if certain compositions are more likely to be one way or the other, and if that correlates with any "generally held" opinions on them. A rainy day perhaps.

_________________
Other setups:
SDC Custom Blade/Butterfly Dignics 80/Butterfly Glayzer
BTY Viscaria/Tibhar K3/Tibhar K3

I was right, then - the numbers are in Hertz and it's tone rather than time you're talking about. Just noticed the initial post has been edited..

I'll need to follow the links next time I am at a computer.. doing it on a phone drives me nuts!

Iskandar

I'd agree that there is no scientific basis to go on however in general terms I think it has its place as a complimentary tool. If you sort the list in order of frequency there is a clear correlation in many cases (maybe not all) in that we see the faster blades as we know them have higher values and slower blades as we know them have lower values.

Given that we already know that perhaps a Timo Boll Spirit is OFF and a Donic Appelgren Allplay is ALL, you could argue that the concept is meaningless as we already have general guides.

I've just measured my Yasaka Extra (5ply All wood) and it comes in at 1184 and sits in the middle of the ALL+ range. I also measured my Tibhar Lebesson (also 5 play All Wood) and it comes in at 1,248 which is in the ALL+ range by the smallest margin. 1,250 is what the guide is for OFF-. When you read the ratings for this blade on websites, I've seen Off - but also recall seeing OFF (but can't find it now so could be wrong). The Tibhar Stratus Powerwood is also rated Off- but clearly faster. As they are similar constructions I think its a valid tool to use, along with reviews to compare blades.

Another time its likely to be useful is when comparing Chinese blades. The Sanwei M8 is listed as ALL in online shops however it comes in at 1,287 on the frequency chart which puts it faster than my Off- Lebesson. The Galaxy 896, also rated ALL is faster again at 1,301. I've not used the M8 but have the 896 and would definitely say its faster than a Euro ALL.

So all though this method is flawed and not the be all and end all, I think its worth using as one of the tools, along with other things, when determining the speed of a blade.

_________________
Donic Waldner Senso V1,FH Baracuda Big Slam 2.0mm ,BH Victas Triple Regular 2.0mm

Note what it says printed on the M8's face:





I also noticed the N11 isn't on that list.. wonder how fast it is. It is considerably faster than the M8.

Iskandar

One appealing aspect of this exercise is that it removes variation between what different brands call DEF, ALL, OFF etc. I like that, even though I probably won't ever rely on this metric alone.

_________________
USATT: 1807 | League: 1887

Interesting that I've tested a few blades now and the Yinhe 896 which is often listed as ALL is actually more ALL+ / OFF- on the frequency chart with a reading of 1270, similar to the Sanwei M8. My Lebesson rated Off- was only 1248. Of course this alone does not suggest that these figures are an absolute measurement of speed however I think we can safely conclude that the 896 is faster than a traditional ALL blade like the Stiga Allround Classic and the frequency reading is a very useful tool.

_________________
Donic Waldner Senso V1,FH Baracuda Big Slam 2.0mm ,BH Victas Triple Regular 2.0mm

Freqs aka dink or tonk methods?

It is a valid methods to measure blade stiffness.

We use same methods in golf, to measure shaft stiffness.

Sent from my T1X Plus using Tapatalk

What affect do you think that: -
a) a crack through the neck but handle attached
b) the handle completely snapped off

would have on the tone of the blade?

I've tested a few broken bats lately and not sure how they would stack up if fully in tact. Comparing to other results pretty similar but there has been an exception.

Another interesting observation is that the Yasaka Ma Lin Carbon is advertised as offensive but sits in the middle of the ALL+ range by tone. I wonder if they carbon brings down the tone but keeps the speed or if it really is more ALL+ than OFF?

_________________
Donic Waldner Senso V1,FH Baracuda Big Slam 2.0mm ,BH Victas Triple Regular 2.0mm