Pianotech

Expand all | Collapse all

Hammer suggestion

  • 1.  Hammer suggestion

    Posted 07-08-2013 02:07
    What hammer would you suggest to have the closest power and tonal quality as the Ronsen Wurzen?   Ronsen is closed for a two week vacation and I need to go with a different manufacturer for time sake.  This church piano needs plenty of power without any harsh or brittle sound.  Is the Renner blue points with Weickert comparable to the Ronsen Wurzen?  Does Brooks LTD have a comparable hammer?  Ray at Ronsen had said that their  Weickert would be a little less power than the Wurzen.  I don't want to have to use any lacquer or other hardeners.  


    -------------------------------------------
    Bob Hull
    Jackson TN
    731-695-8419
    -------------------------------------------


  • 2.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Posted 07-09-2013 12:47
    Bob,

    Abel makes a variety of hammers you could choose. I really like Renner Blue Points (this from one who hates Renner Premium Blues) - the Blue Points have power and color and are the most resilient hammer I have ever experienced. I also really like Ronsen Weickert hammers. The Ronsen hammers are very good right out of the box, but they often will need some juicing. The Blue Points will need needling as Rick Baldassin suggests. The amazing thing about the Blue Points is that you can bury a 10 mm 3-needle tool in the shoulders of these hammers. And in fact you need to do that to open up the hammers. 

    So the answer is that if you absolutely do not want to use juice, go with the Blue Points or one of the Abels. If you don't mind using some juice, go with the Ronsen Weickerts. You might be able to get a set from Dale Erwin.

    -------------------------------------------
    Alan McCoy
    Spokane WA
    ahm2352@gmail.com
    -------------------------------------------








  • 3.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Registered Piano Technician
    Posted 07-09-2013 15:10
    Good to know, Alan.  I didn't much care for the Renner Premiums either.  Never tried the blue points.  I love the Abel Naturals I get from Melanie Brooks!  Very forgiving, and really don't need a lot of work.  I'm working right now on an early '80's Steinway M.  Raw right now, but they sound really nice, just a bit of juice in the bass needed, most of the high treble and mid sections are not too bad.  I haven't touched them yet, just raw....not even fine sanded yet either. no needle has touched them yet either; just getting things lined up with semi-nice regulation now, and lots of chip tunings on the new strings, (Roslau treble and Mapes bass strings). You can open up the sound with them as well with some (not even 10mm) jabs in the middle-upper shoulders to open the sound. I use Wally's advice with the shoulder stabs that they should be on the 10am-2pm straight down lining up with the mouldings. Good hammers indeed! I've received lots of compliments on the finished products here at UNL.

    I've installed about a dozen of the Natural Felt Abels now, and like the consistency of them.  Once one knows a brand that is consistant, they're a joy to work with, and quick too :>)

    There are plenty of good hammers out there.  It is the one that you like to work with that brings the smile to pianist once you know what to do with them. I'll agree with some followers that some hammers just don't like some pianos; I just like the Abels.

    Paul


    -------------------------------------------
    Paul T. Williams RPT
    Piano Technician
    University of Nebraska
    Lincoln, NE 68588-0100
    pwilliams4@unl.edu
    -------------------------------------------








  • 4.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Registered Piano Technician
    Posted 07-10-2013 09:55

    Hi Bob and Paul.  I too have had really good results with Abel Naturals.  Out of the box, into the piano and darn little else brings a smile to everyone so far.

    I had the opportunity to hear different manufacturer's hammers on the same piano a month or three back and Abels were definitely one of the top choices.  Details escape me now but I know Ari Isaac's were one of them, and I think Renner was another.  1920's Steinway B



  • 5.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Registered Piano Technician
    Posted 07-10-2013 15:12
    If you are looking for a hammer with similar characteristics you won't find it outside the Ronsen family.  There are several reasons for that and I won't go into all the details.  But the manufacturing process of virtually all other hammers is different, as may be the felt, depending on what you are looking at.  Ronsen hammers are 100% cold pressed and that gives them a particular character that is different from heat pressed hammers.  There are other differences as well.  While the application of heat during the pre and post pressing process may vary from maker to maker it has become a standard in the industry and it is not without consequences.  That application of heat changes things when compared to Ronsen hammers.  Both Abel naturals and Renner Blue Points have very different characteristics from the Wurzen hammers you are seeking to find a match for.  I'm not saying that these two particular hammers may not be to your liking or to others liking, for that matter, but they will be different, they will respond differently, they will require different types of voicing approaches (and likely more treatment) and they will develop differently. 

    If the charcter of the Ronsen Wurzen hammer is what you want then I'd wait.  What's two weeks when you are talking about the life of the hammer on this particular piano. 

    -------------------------------------------
    David Love RPT
    www.davidlovepianos.com
    davidlovepianos@comcast.net
    415 407 8320
    -------------------------------------------








  • 6.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Registered Piano Technician
    Posted 07-10-2013 15:49
    David,
    I doubt there are very many similarities at all between brands, other than appearance. That's what makes the choices so great.  I've tried several different kinds both hot and cold pressed; mostly on Steinways, but some Baldwin and Mason &Hamlin grands as that's about all we have here. I do have a couple Yamaha C-2's that needs new stuffs. what would you all suggest for that one?

    No uprights yet for some 20 years.  Sorry to say I haven't yet tried Issaks yet.  I would like to, for comparison; I hear very nice things about them. To each his/her own.  Hammers are as different as ears to hear them or the technician to reach perfection with them.  There's always something to do with any of them :>)  that's the hard part! I still have not gotten even close to "perfection"!  I'll probably never be 100% pleased, but at least now, I'm getting to the 80-90% happy with them.  It keeps me going to better myself each time however!

    Some hammers need a lot of work, some not so much.  In the university setting, I need the fastest and least amount of upkeep on hammers, hence the Abel Naturals.  Obviously they won't work for everyone.  I just like them.  I'm finding also that they are pretty long lasting.

    We can dive further into the discussion and find out where the sheep are raised, what part of the country (wherever that is) whether high land or low land sheep, their diet, etc.  I'm sure all these manufacturers do all this.  Wally explained some of this to us in an all day seminar out here about the Abel Naturals.  Very interesting.

    Good luck to you all with whatever you like to use.  Finally, I'm finding that the more I use one brand, the better I get with them. I guess that should be understood.

    Best,
    Paul




    -------------------------------------------
    Paul T. Williams RPT
    Piano Technician
    University of Nebraska
    Lincoln, NE 68588-0100
    pwilliams4@unl.edu
    -------------------------------------------








  • 7.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Posted 07-10-2013 22:10
    Paul, I know this was directed to David, but, your query,

    "I do have a couple Yamaha C-2's that needs new stuffs. what would you all suggest for that one?"

    Combined with the demand,

    "Some hammers need a lot of work, some not so much.  In the university setting, I need the fastest and least amount of upkeep on hammers,"

    begs the suggestion that you call Yamaha, and purchase pre-hung hammers for the Yamaha C-2's.

    Mock Steinway Hammers all you want. Many will tell you even with pre-lacquering there is nothing easier to work with on a Steinway than such a hammer. Does not appear those people demonstrate a propensity for extroversion, at least, on this social media site. But far as reputation sake in the field, those people are no less important than those in charge of the personality cult here. Believe it or not, it does not take a miracle worker to make, with the qualifying category, "good", Steinway Hammers work on a Steinway.

    -------------------------------------------
    Benjamin Sloane
    Cincinnati OH
    513-257-8480
    -------------------------------------------








  • 8.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Registered Piano Technician
    Posted 07-11-2013 10:32
    Yes, it seems to be the prevailing view that "Some hammers need a lot of work, some not so much."  My view of that is somewhat different.  I think that if hammers need a lot of work (and that includes a large infusion of lacquer) then either it's a poorly made hammer or it's the wrong hammer for that piano.  As you say, we get good at working with a particular hammer, used to it even, and so I'm not suggesting that we, as skilled technicians, can't try and make a silk purse out of sow's ear.  But we shouldn't have to, and sometimes we can't. 

    Hammer characteristics must match sounding structure characteristics in order to "work".  If they don't then we manipulate them (harder to manipulate the sounding structure).  The work we do in voicing is largely impedance matching, controlling the flow of energy from the hammer, really the rate of energy absorption by the hammer, to match the soundboard impedance.  If the hammer is absorbing too much energy, we harden it (or lighten it), if it's not absorbing enough, we needle it. 

    But I believe that a properly designed and matched hammer doesn't need anything, other than the inevitable smoothing out, and that this should be the goal of both hammer making and hammer selection.  Everything we do to the hammer whether needle work or lacquer, disrupts the continuity of the felt and shortens its life.  The more we can avoid that the better.  We will be better off with a hammer that needs only one or two needle insertions than 50, both for our sake and for the hammer's.

    Yes, it all starts with the wool fiber and a proper blend of short and long fibers is what constitutes good hammer felt.  That combined with the felt making process.  Not all felt is created equal.  Of the basic four processes, Weikert (and Wurzen), Bacon, VFG, Japanese, Weikert is the best in terms of quality of wool fiber, consistency, amount of interlocking, etc.  But good felt can be ruined by poor hammer making or by practices and combinations that aren't conducive to good outcomes.

    We do have many choices today but not all choices on par with each other. 

    -------------------------------------------
    David Love RPT
    www.davidlovepianos.com
    davidlovepianos@comcast.net
    415 407 8320
    -------------------------------------------








  • 9.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Posted 07-11-2013 12:18
    This most recent post of yours, David, on hammers is absolutely excellent. Thank you for taking the time.

    Keith McGavern, RPT
    Shawnee, Oklahoma, USA
    tune-repair@allegiance.tv



  • 10.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Posted 07-11-2013 13:50
    I am going to possibly digress here on this one statement that David L. made:

    Any of you ever gone to a favorite eat place, order a certain item and have it be absolutely fantastic. So, you say, let's to there again later on, only to find out that that same menu item does not live up to the expectations of your remembered "absolutely fantastic" experience.

    Well, the wife and I have been there more than I care to share. There is no guarantee that what you experience in today's day will ever be the same as tomorrow's day. Relying on yesterday's manna, expecting it be the same manna for today will, without question, be extremely disappointing in the long run.

    Keith McGavern, RPT
    Shawnee, Oklahoma, USA
    tune-repair@allegiance.tv



  • 11.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Registered Piano Technician
    Posted 07-11-2013 15:27
    Funny you should say that, Keith.  We have re-visited an establishment that wasn't the best the first time, but gave them a second chance, and behold!  Beautiful food and service.  You never know eh?

    -------------------------------------------
    Paul T. Williams RPT
    Piano Technician
    University of Nebraska
    Lincoln, NE 68588-0100
    pwilliams4@unl.edu
    -------------------------------------------








  • 12.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Posted 07-11-2013 15:36
    With restaurants, what you are forgetting is, that they have more than one chef/cook, so depending on which one makes the meal, you can have good and bad.

    -------------------------------------------
    John M. Ross
    Ross Piano Service
    Windsor, Nova Scotia, Canada
    jrpiano@bellaliant.net


    -------------------------------------------








  • 13.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Registered Piano Technician
    Posted 07-11-2013 16:09
    Same with service. some are great, and some need "servicing". ha ha!

    -------------------------------------------
    Paul T. Williams RPT
    Piano Technician
    University of Nebraska
    Lincoln, NE 68588-0100
    pwilliams4@unl.edu
    -------------------------------------------








  • 14.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Registered Piano Technician
    Posted 07-11-2013 20:31
    For a few years in the early 1980's I worked at Tuners Supply Co. At the time they made most of their own tools - remember the "Hale" brand? There were 5 or 6 machinists who worked there making tools. Some of them were better at making certain tools than others. In many instances you could inspect the finished tool and know who made it - if you knew what to look for. Consistency was sometimes a problem.
    I assume the same potential for inconsistency exists when it comes to hammer making. There is bound to be some variation in felt and wood, to say nothing of the human factor. The best a hammer maker can do is create tolerances which allow for some inconsistency while, at the same time, assuring the highest quality.    

    -------------------------------------------
    Gerry Johnston
    Haverhill MA
    978-372-2250
    -------------------------------------------








  • 15.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Posted 07-13-2013 19:43
    David,

    I'm curious in what "group" (of the four you mention) you would include the Renner hammers that Steinway Hamburg utilizes? These hammers are extremely hard-pressed, requiring huge amounts of needling (what Steinway London calls "deep toning" - I don't know what they call it in Hamburg) to bring down from an in-your-face, one-dimensional (ie pretty horrific) sound to something that can eventually be quite warm and wonderful. This is the standard Hamburg sound these days, and the voicing protocol used to achieve it, on countless many sounding European Steinways.

    It sounds reasonable that all this needling (dozens of insertions or even more, starting on the shoulders and working up towards the crown, and then to some degree directly on the crown itself, in the latter stages) might somehow shorten the life of the hammers.

    But has this been somehow established to be true, or is it only a reasonable assumption or theory? could it be that the hammers remain good sounding until they've been worn or resurfaced enough that they need to be replaced anyway? If all this needling really shortens the life of the hammers as is often said, mightn't this be an obvious problem for Hamburg Steinway, and different hammers used? 

    This is not an argument that "the company must know what it's doing"; these are questions that I've puzzled over. My first response, when shown this method of heavy needling used here, was "Huh? - this seems crazy. Won't this destroy the hammers?". And yet I came to discover that it was in fact necessary, and yielded a wonderful tonal result.

    I had grown up in the world of NY lacquered hammers, and then found myself in a sort of parallel universe. All of a sudden the water was spinning in the opposite direction when it went down the drain!

    I've come to love softer Weickert hammers as well, and appreciate that I don't have to spend hours needling them to get a good sound. But are these distinctions that are made between "optimally made" hammers that don't happen require much work and hammers that require either lacquer or extensive needling (and thus by definition perhaps "less well made") accurately established in fact? Because I've heard a lot of great sounding NY and Hamburg instruments, with their completely different hammers. 

    Has anyone ever run tests comparing lacquered hammers versus non-laquered hard and soft pressed hammers, using a note-pounding machine (whatever they're called)? Even if only in terms of physical wear (rather than tonal longevity). 

    Best regards,

    -------------------------------------------
    Allen Wright, RPT
    London, United Kingdom







  • 16.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Registered Piano Technician
    Posted 07-14-2013 09:09
    Allen: There was a very long discussion that took place starting on March 15th of this year and went on for more than three weeks in the Voicing community under the subject line "Lacquer Voicing". You can find this eaily in the archive. Mostly the conversation is between Fred Sturm and me. Over the course of that discussion I cover at great length my view on these issues that you mention. I recognize it's a complicated subject and that there are competing issues and opinions. I don't know that I can add anything to that discussion. You might look at it. ------------------------------------------- David Love RPT www.davidlovepianos.com davidlovepianos@comcast.net 415 407 8320 -------------------------------------------


  • 17.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Registered Piano Technician
    Posted 07-14-2013 11:15
    Allen:

    I just want to add something to me previous brief remarks guiding you to a previous discussion back in March.

    You can't have a discussion about a hammer without also including the piano that the hammer will go on (and its particular characteristics).  The hammer and the sounding structure of the piano are inextricably linked to one another.  The hammer simply cannot be viewed in isolation.  Its characteristics only have meaning in conjunction with the soundboard and scale structure that they are interacting with.  A Hamburg hammer may go on one piano and need little work to create adequate flexibility and yet on another piano you will need to needle it into oblivion.  That will not be due to the inconsistencies in manufacturing or materials, as one person suggested.  It will have to do with the differences in the impedance characteristics of the sounding structure of the piano and how well matched the hammer is.  When I hear people make comments like, "The Renner Blue Point, Abel Natural, Ronsen Weikert ...(pick one) are great hammers, I always ask, with what (and for what)?  It's an incomplete sentence otherwise. 

    I have used the Hamburg Renner hammer on pianos in the past where it was called for (actually where it wasn't called for as well which was all part of the learning process) and not had that much work to do to get them right, maybe more than I would like, but not to the point where I felt the hammer (or my shoulder) was being compromised.  On that same piano (say, a Steinway D), a Ronsen Weikert hammer, at least in its present iteration, would not have been up to the task.  It would have required a lot of stiffening with lacquer and, in my view, suffered as a consequence.  I have also encountered situations in reverse where the Weikert hammer was absolutely the correct hammer, in my opinion, of course, and the Hamburg hammer would have been a poor choice.  These were not necessarily model D's but may well have been Hamburg Steinways, probably older ones with original boards.

    I don't agree with the fact that the Hamburg Steinway company manufactures basically the same hammer (with the exception of weight) for their Model O as they do for their model D.  If there are differences in overall design density it is not that apparent. Yet the Steinway O is a much lighter weight soundboard than the D, lower tension scale, it doesn't require nearly the input that the D with its heavy soundboard and high tension scale does.  The reduction in weight for the smaller piano, in fact, will tend to make that hammer even brighter (more upper partial development) and its somewhat lower profile (less felt over the crown) will add to a performance characteristic of less flexibility in that area which means the hammer won't be as stable, will bottom out more quickly (like an old shock absorber), especially after the amount of needling required to make it compliant and the resulting and inevitable loss of tension that accompanies that process.

    Thus, matching hammers and soundboards is very critical and the differences between various hammers should be (actually, must be) taken into consideration along with the differences in the sounding structure.  That might be a design difference (as between the S&S Model D and Model O) or it might be a functional difference associated with age.  A new stiff soundboard assembly may well required a different hammer than an old floppier one.  Similarly, the hammer that suited a piano when it was young might well be a mismatch when that piano is old. 



    -------------------------------------------
    David Love RPT
    www.davidlovepianos.com
    davidlovepianos@comcast.net
    415 407 8320
    -------------------------------------------








  • 18.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Posted 07-14-2013 16:25
    Hi David,

    The sentences below (excerpted) seem contradictory; is that how you meant to say it? 

    (Also I'm assuming that you don't mean that Steinway Hamburg manufactures its own hammers).

    Yes, it goes without saying that hammers perform differently on different pianos. However my experience in installing many new sets of Hamburg Steinway Renners (out of the box) on every different model of Hamburg Steinways, and of various ages, is that virtually all needed a LOT of needling. More than one might think healthy-for the hammer or the voicer.

    This is a pretty interesting phenomenon; that an instrument so highly regarded (and rightly so) seems to work very well with incredibly hard-pressed hammers that require heavy needling. Tends to make me want to keep an open mind on these matters. Same with lacquering.

    I'm still wondering whether anyone has actually objectively tested the longevity of different sorts of hammers. I'll look back at your discussion with Fred and see if that point came up.

    -------------------------------------------
    Allen Wright, RPT






  • 19.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Registered Piano Technician
    Posted 07-15-2013 03:03
    Yes, that's as I intended. I don't see the contradiction. I do realize that Steinway doesn't actually make their own hammers. I assume they do tell Renner what they want. ------------------------------------------- David Love RPT www.davidlovepianos.com davidlovepianos@comcast.net 415 407 8320 -------------------------------------------


  • 20.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Posted 07-16-2013 09:16

    My own S&S  Model A (Hamburg) No.164082 - which dates it as one of the last out of Germany before WWl - still has the original hammers (with very little signs of wear) and keytops (head and tail) which are in excellent condition - no re-gluing signs anywhere. I have restrung it and replaced dampers felts (S&S) and rollers (Abel) otherwise all is original.. Interestingly it has an incredibly light action - about 40g. and 'Spring Assists'. Pianists love playing it. So the hammer felt business from Hamburg in this discussion makes me wonder why the new sets of S&S hammers are so hard and in need of so much needling. Has so much changed in the making of hammers for Hamburg S&S?
    Michael (UK)  
    -------------------------------------------
    Michael Gamble
    semi retired
    Brighton
    01273813612
    -------------------------------------------








  • 21.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Registered Piano Technician
    Posted 07-17-2013 07:25
    Yes, much has changed. The current iteration of the hamburg hammer bears little resemblance to the hammer on your piano in weight, density, internal tension (at least hen they were new), amount of needling required and other aspects as well. Similarly, the current NY hammer bears little resemblance to the NY hammer of that period either. The early NY hammer was a completely different animal starting with a different felt and ending without the need or use of lacquer as a rescue effort . In terms of longevity, the hammers that will last the longest will be lighter, rather than heavier, have more, rather than less, internal tension, will have had less needling (see my previous point re tension), not be lacquered. I think density is more complicated in this respect because it depends on how density is achieved: pressing or stretching. High density hammers from pressing won't have much tonal stability because they have less tension. Thus they will get needled more over the course of their life causing even more loss of tension resulting in poor tonal quality and faster wear. Hammers achieving density from stretching will have more internal tension, more bounce, more tonal stability, require less needling and so last longer. Highly stretched hammers tend be cold pressed and use thinner felt so are also lighter in weight. There is more to it than that, of course, but that's a start. ------------------------------------------- David Love RPT www.davidlovepianos.com davidlovepianos@comcast.net 415 407 8320 -------------------------------------------


  • 22.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Posted 07-18-2013 18:55


    -------------------------------------------
    Allen Wright, RPT
    London, United Kingdom


    -------------------------------------------

    David,

    Is this based theory, on your personal observations and experience (ie. anecdotal), or maybe (even better) some sort of "controlled" longterm observations-perhaps at an institution?






  • 23.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Posted 07-19-2013 02:00
    Sir Allen,

    If I may pipe in. If there is anyone who has done a more extensive research on hammers and their discussion, I know not who.

    He is either right on with his comments, or totally off somewhere else. There is no middle ground with his extensive posts on the subject of hammers at my.ptg.org. And the great thing about David, he is open to any and all possibilities that would expound even further information on this subject.

    Sincerest regards,

    Keith McGavern, RPT
    Shawnee, Oklahoma, USA
    tune-repair@allegiance.tv



  • 24.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Registered Piano Technician
    Posted 07-19-2013 12:20
    All other things being equal (principally usage of the piano, how hard and how much), my experience suggests that the main factor in hammer durability lies in the technician and his techniques. For a "hard pressed" hammer, that would be mostly needling techniques. I would suggest that less insertions of longer needles (10 - 12 mm), done with a pressing rather than stabbing motion, results in much longer hammer life and greater durability of the tonal effect. The "opposite" would be lots of shallow strokes (5 - 6 mm), with a jabbing technique, as in what I have often observed with Yamaha technicians (not to single Yamaha out in particular, but it may be a familiar image from videos and demos in classes). 

    Similarly with treatment of the felt right at the crown. Very controlled insertions (meaning needles are placed precisely, and inserted cleanly rather than rolled, for instance) of smaller diameter needles is far more durable than "pecking" at the surface or rolling with larger diameter needles.

    With lacquered hammers, the key for durability is to add the minimum amount of lacquer initially, and apply it where it is needed (core between molding and strike point), which will produce a result that requires much less needling to create an initial voicing set up, and less maintenance insertion of needles over the years. The shoulders should never be saturated to the extent that a 3 needle tool with 10 mm needles can't be inserted completely with reasonable force, as one way to judge this.

    I come at this from experience in a low budget institutional setting where I have needed to keep hammers functioning well much longer than other places I read about. So my #1 concert D still has its original hammers from 2001, and I have no immediate plans for replacement, for instance. It is a piano that gets glowing reviews from both locals and visiting artists, so it isn't just my own taste that is involved. And I have some practice room instruments with 25 - 30 year old hammers that are still quite adequate (though slated for replacement within the next five years).

    I guess I should also mention filing: it is possible to over-file, for instance, and if you are working in super-critical situations where you are filing several times a year, that will have a big effect. I file just to the "tops of the grooves" in most cases, and do maintenance needling with small needles right in the grooves (shallow, straight in) to keep that area of the crown from becoming too packed.


    -------------------------------------------
    Fred Sturm
    University of New Mexico
    fssturm@unm.edu
    http://fredsturm.net
    "When I smell a flower, I don't think about how it was cultivated. I like to listen to music the same way." -Federico Mompou
    -------------------------------------------








  • 25.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Registered Piano Technician
    Posted 07-21-2013 21:57
    All of the above (or below in this case).  I have had the opportunity to observe and track various hammers over time including in an institutional setting where they were put through the test.  The theory is not so difficult.  Hammers change and wear due to the stability of the fibers themselves.  The hammer is a less than perfect spring.  In the process of the elastic collision with the string the hammer flexes but doesn't return exactly to its original form (a sort of hysteresis).  The degree to which it doesn't return to its original form is a function of several different factors.  First, greater tension in the outer layers provides a more elastic quality to that part of the hammer, a more perfect spring, as it were.  Greater interlocking of the felt and healthy fiber provides greater resilience to fiber reorientation as well.  Lighter hammers mean less force during the collision between hammers and strings.  More flexibility in the strings also accounts for something, possibly differentiating some between treble and bass development.

    Hammers that are cold pressed have more tension.  Hammers that are simply pressed to a certain density at the expense of tension (and all heat pressing both in the pre and post pressing process will reduce tension) means that the hammer has less resislience, forms a less perfect spring, compacts more readily rather than springs back. Hammer that are pressed (as opposed to stretched) to achieve the requisite density, while they may well sound ok out of the box, tend to develop poorly, become harder and less resilient faster and won't wear as well.  In addition, they will invariably require more needling which further disturbs the interlocking and intergrity of the felt, reduces tension and thus allows for greater movement of the fibers in the process of collision with the string.   In combination with that notion is the fact that only the highest quality felt that is well interlocked and with healthy fiber can be adequately stretched to achieve a density that will deliver enough power. 

    Needling and lacquering both reduce the health and resilience of the felt and will therefore shorten the life and reduce the stability of the voicing and therefore the life expectency of the hammer.  In the case of hammers, less is more.  Ironically, the more the felt needs to be needled, the more often it will need to be needled.  Every phase of needling will reduce the integrity of the felt and allow for more shifting of the fiber during impact with the string.  That creates less stable voicing, faster changing of hammer shape (crown crushing), more frequent filing requirements, reduction of the tension existing in the outer layers of felt and a shorter hammer life.

    Lacquer has a variety of problems.  First, it tends to be required on felt which is already inadequate, lacking structural integrity and some minimum level of density or tension and thereby allowing for greater movement of the fiber.  Second, the lacquer stiffens the fiber and reduces whatever elasticity it may have.  Too much lacquer can make the fiber brittle, it won't hold up to any type of collision without movement or damage to the fiber itself.  Third, laquer continues to harden over time and as you go deeper into the hammer where the felt transitions from being under tension to being under compression (this aspect of the hammer changes as you go deeper into it) the lacquer tends to bind everything.  Lacquered hammers generally do not develop well over time and filing reveals the weakness in the concept.  The more plasticized layers that are uncovered as you file become something other than felt as you delve deeper into the hammer.

    The current hammer making trends generally, in my opininion, are largely misguided, based on I don't know what: production schedules, bad habits, some trend whose basis is a mystery to me, acceptance, for some unknown reason, that massive amounts of needling are the norm and to be expected, fear of inadquate power, a wrong headed attempt to minimize factory voicing procedures before the pianos are put out for sale.  I'm not really sure.  As I mentioned, the use of lacquer as a routine practice comes from a period in which the hammer that was made was wholly inadequate and some remedy needed to be found.  The innovative techs in the factory came up with a solution.  That became an accepted norm.  I might add that it belongs to a single manufacturer.  The hammers that you referred to from the earlier part of the century were much more on track, more elastic felt, no heat used in pressing, thinly profiled, not excessively heavy, quality felt.  On many of the current instruments where the hammer has changed the scale and soundboards have not, thus the requirements should not have changed.  Admittedly, there are cases where heavier soundboards with higher tension scales have been developed and it may be appropriate there to produce a heavier hammer.  That the hammer needs to be pressed in such a manner to reduce resilience I think is a mistake even if the energy input requirement in those systems is greater.  That sacrifice, in my view, is not necessary. 

    It is certainly no secret that I am disappointed in the state of hammer making generally.  New products are constantly being introduced yet they are generally just more of the same.  Apropos of this disussion there are any number of hammers being produced that sound relatively ok out of the box.  How they sound after even a modest amount of playing is another story.  Here my experience following may of these Golden Geese has proven disappointing.  The eggs they are laying are certainly not gold. 



    -------------------------------------------
    David Love RPT
    www.davidlovepianos.com
    davidlovepianos@comcast.net
    415 407 8320
    -------------------------------------------








  • 26.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Posted 07-22-2013 16:35
    That's very interesting, David. Thanks for such a thorough and articulate summary of your thoughts on hammers and voicing. It gives much food for thought and observation. Straying a bit off topic, it's interesting to me that the majority of the early 20th cent Hamburg Steinways with the light hammers That we see have repetitions with assist springs. With such light hammers, they obviously weren't "necessary", per se. Either they consciously preferred the different touch that created, or had some other reason for using them. I wish we hadn't lost all the German factory records and documents, there might be some interesting things to learn about what they (particularly C F Theodore) were thinking - as well as who made those beautiful old hammers. Best regards, ------------------------------------------- Allen Wright, RPT London, United Kingdom -------------------------------------------


  • 27.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Posted 07-18-2013 17:50
    Michael,

    Have you noticed all those old yellow core hammers on Hamburg Steinways from the first half of the 20th century? I don't know who made them (I don't know if anybody does - if so I'd like to know), but they were very light and soft. And many (although not all) the pianos had assist springs, as a matter of course. The hammers they use today are quite heavier, and very hard pressed; so yes, they're completely different. One has to adapt the geometry on the old actions in order for the Renners to work on the old instruments.

    On my personal Hamburg O from 1919 I decided to go a non-traditional route, and installed Ronsen Weickert hammers, Crescendo conical front washers and WNG parts (including damper system).  I love the touch and the sound. If you're in London sometime and are curious to check it out, feel free to get in touch. I can show you typical old style hammers (and even some rabbit hammers, of which I have two complete sets).

    Regards,

    -------------------------------------------
    Allen Wright, RPT
    London, United Kingdom


    -------------------------------------------








  • 28.  Hammer suggestion

    Registered Piano Technician
    Posted 07-14-2013 19:49



  • 29.  RE:Hammer suggestion

    Posted 07-16-2013 05:42
    Those are very interesting observations over the long term, Ed - thanks! 

    I had a similar experience with a set of new NY Steinway hammers on a Model O, which a voice faculty guy loved just the way they were - and which objectively speaking, were some of the wooliest and weakest sounding hammers I'd ever installed, and ripe for a boost, in my opinion. But I agreed to leave them alone, and within a year or so they had come up wonderfully. 

    If 'm reading you right, it would seem that your experience was that the hard pressed, lightly needled hammers lasted the longest. And the extensively needled ones wore the quickest. With lacquered hammers somewhere in between, but harder to work with later?

    And if (I don't know, never having used them back then) the Ronsens were like current ones, soft pressed ones, that perhaps soft pressed hammers don't last as long. 

    Interestingly, several sets of hammers made with rabbit fur (from a brief period at the end of WWI, used I presume because of austerity measures) have come through the Restoration Dept in Steinway London over the years, and all of them (the ones I saw, and also ones reported to me) all were very lightly worn. And these are the softest hammers I've ever experienced. Which made me wonder if perhaps super soft hammer last longer; or perhaps it was something about the makeup of the rabbit fur? (They sounded quite lovely, if very quiet; they responded to light shoulder lacquering in the melodic quite beautifully).

    Best regards,

    -------------------------------------------
    Allen Wright, RPT
    London, United Kingdom


    -------------------------------------------