I reference hammer choice now based on tonal preference. A Bacon hammer can make a U1 sound much sweeter, still with plenty of home sized power. Even though the Yamaha board may be designed to be bright, the hammer choice is an aesthetic choice. U1's function with Yamaha rocks and Renner blues could probably create a similar brash sound. I don't like that sound in a home, and frankly none of my clients appreciate that brash tone either. They both function, one over the other is an aesthetic choice.
Choose a hammer designed to make a brash impact, and you will chase that brashness for the entire life of the hammer...it will always tend to harsh impacts, as impact control is the name of the game.
Frankly re impedance matching reasoning, which I had subscribed to earlier, I am exiting that line of thought as I accumulate more and more data in my rebuilds. Harder heavier hammers simply do not create a sound I want my pianos to make, for any venue. Though most of my venues are home venues, even in certain performance venues, re harder hammers, (not heavier, as I do not install heavy hammers), I and the site tech wish we had stuck with the Bacon's we originally intended to use. We jumped ship and went to the Weikerts in the heat of battle having been scared away from Bacon's because of the impedance/venue argument which predominates. We are constantly chasing the treble tone with these Weikerts...the board is new with plenty of stiffness.
I simply want the sound the softer hammer provides. My thinking is more along these lines; a softer hammer already possesses the organic resilience distributed throughout the entire hammer that I am looking for. Very slight stiffening of the hammer in select locations gets me the "pop". Harder hammers just can not be brought down in the organic, well distributed fashion that a soft hammer already, by design contains.
------------------------------
Jim Ialeggio
grandpianosolutions.com
Shirley, MA
978 425-9026
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 09-15-2020 23:08
From: Edward McMorrow
Subject: Bacon felt
I thought piano hammers had to hit strings before being able to move the soundboard.
Lighter soundboards usually will transmit hammer knock noise quicker. Lighter hammers produce less knock noise as do softer ones.
Heavier hammers in a piano with a heavier board makes more "Thwap" sound during hammer string contact time than a lighter board with the same weight hammer. The lighter board will make more of a "Twhock sound
------------------------------
Edward McMorrow
Edmonds WA
425-299-3431
Original Message:
Sent: 09-15-2020 13:15
From: Chris Chernobieff
Subject: Bacon felt
"For example, the soundboard impedance must be higher (not matched) than the hammer that excites it. If the soundboard and hammer were an exact impedance match, you would experience a sound akin to a thud. We hear this in old soundboards whose internal tension (a flat board) is next to zero".
Roger,
So then, what hammers would be such an impedance mismatch that would cause an old "no tension" soundboard to sound good?
-chris
------------------------------
Chernobieff Piano Restorations
"Where Tone is Key"
chernobieffpiano.com
grandpianoman@protonmail.com
Lenoir City, TN
865-986-7720
Original Message:
Sent: 09-15-2020 10:48
From: David Love
Subject: Bacon felt
As an "impedance matching mystic" (I gave up grandiose self importance when I was a teenager), softer hammers tend to match well with lighter weight systems. Steinways tend to be a lighter weight system so Bacon Felt hammers work well there no matter what the vintage. Generally the hammer must have enough stiffness and mass to drive the system adequately and so a hammer that works well out of the box on a Steinway M may not be adequate on a Steinway D without some manipulation. Those differences are impedance driven. On the other hand a hammer that is too stiff or too massive can overdrive a lighter system and will require manipulation in other direction. Do you end up in the same place no matter where you start? Well, I don't think you do. Since belies vary in their response even with the same model there are generally going to be some voicing adjustments required even if it's just to provide balance through the scale
That being said, tonal tastes vary and so something that appeals to one customer may not appeal to another. The Ronsen Bacon Felt hammer will be a bit darker out of the box and likely will require some modest stiffening at the top end. If you prefer a hammer with a lot of drive then you may have to stiffen the entire set or choose a stiffer hammer like Renner Blue or Abel Natural. In general, Renner and Abel hammers will require a fair about of needling, Ronsen hammers won't
The variability in the Ronsen response that our resident expert on everything cites I don't think has to do with inconsistency in the pressing but rather differences in dimensions. I don't prefer a softer hammer that has too much bulk or mass as it can be too dark and require a lot of stiffening. I'm generally somewhat specific with Ray about hammer dimensions (profiles) and that will make a difference as to how the hammer will need to be treated. The original Steinway hammer, pre WW2, was a generally light weight and softer hammer and worked very well, IMO.
------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320
Original Message:
Sent: 09-14-2020 13:31
From: Joe Wiencek
Subject: Bacon felt
For those proponents of the Ronsen Bacon felt hammers, what type of belly system (string tensions/rib scaling) are you matching to the hammers? Would you put them on a recent Steinway belly, say of the last 20-30 years' production?
Joe Wiencek