Pianotech

Hi Joe,

Three questions for additional information. Are these new hammers or have they been worn in already? Did you already reshape / file the hammers? Have you leveled the strings and mated the hammers to them?

Ben, Here are the answers to your questions:

 Are these new hammers or have they been worn in already? Answer: They are new hammers.

Did you already reshape / file the hammers? Answer: Yes, I shaped them so the have a good point on the strike point. This helped the sound. I also smoothed out the strike point with fine sand paper. 

Have you leveled the strings and mated the hammers to them? Answer: Yes, strings are leveled and hammers are mated to the strings. Also, the strike weight of the hammer, front weight of the key, and DW/UW/BW have been refined. Notes have been well regulated.

Hi Joe,

Three questions for additional information. Are these new hammers or have they been worn in already? Did you already reshape / file the hammers? Have you leveled the strings and mated the hammers to them?

Ben, Here are the answers to your questions:

 Are these new hammers or have they been worn in already? Answer: They are new hammers.

Did you already reshape / file the hammers? Answer: Yes, I shaped them so the have a good point on the strike point. This helped the sound. I also smoothed out the strike point with fine sand paper. 

Have you leveled the strings and mated the hammers to them? Answer: Yes, strings are leveled and hammers are mated to the strings. Also, the strike weight of the hammer, front weight of the key, and DW/UW/BW have been refined. Notes have been well regulated.

Ben, Here are the answers to your questions:

 Are these new hammers or have they been worn in already? Answer: They are new hammers.

Did you already reshape / file the hammers? Answer: Yes, I shaped them so the have a good point on the strike point. This helped the sound. I also smoothed out the strike point with fine sand paper. 

Have you leveled the strings and mated the hammers to them? Answer: Yes, strings are leveled and hammers are mated to the strings. Also, the strike weight of the hammer, front weight of the key, and DW/UW/BW have been refined. Notes have been well regulated.

The Fazioli method is pre-needling in the 9 to 10:30 range and equivalent on the other side 3 o'clock to 130. that pre-needling tends to open up the hammer and increase the overall dynamic range. Out of the box, with cupping, usually those hammers are squared first with sandpaper.  Needling above 1030 or 130 is to address mid range dynamics (downward), and closer to the crown, to reduce excessive brightness and work the pianissimo range. 

Some hammers will develop over time if you have the time. But waiting a couple of years for most pianists is not something they want to do and if the piano is not played a good number of hours every day it'll take longer than that.  

Generally, I'm not a fan of needling up the center of the hammer to take out the cupping. If the belief is that tension has been released at the side of the hammer when they're cut apart, not an unreasonable assumption, then the question would be, why would you want to release tension and bring down the center of the hammer when the problem is usually that the hammer is too weak?   Better to file away the somewhat dead and felt that is responsible for the cupping.  

My preference is to put the hammers in a hammer vice before you do anything, file the hammers to remove the cupping from the top and square the top of the hammer. Polish it down to a very fine grit with maybe 800 or 1000 paper.  

If it's a firmer pressed hammer like a Renner style hammer then you'll want to use a three needle tool and needle in the low shoulder, 9 to 1030 on both sides, and count stitches. You might do that before you file so you can remove the needle marks.  Usually you'll need six or eight stitches in the bass hammers and progressively fewer as you go up to treble. Needles should be 8 to 10 mms, #5 or #6. That procedure on a firmer hammer can increase power to a point. 

On a Ronsen Hammer, I'm not sure you benefit from pre-needling in terms of increasing dynamic range but you might a little bit. Don't go above 1030 or 130 though otherwise the hammer will start going the other way.  I generally think it's better to give the hammers a little bit of a head start, even if it's a fairly light stiffening solution. A drop or two on the crown might be required as well in the bass and treble.  

But without the Piano in front of me and goals clearly outlined, it's really hard to comment. That's just the general procedure. 

Ben, Here are the answers to your questions:

 Are these new hammers or have they been worn in already? Answer: They are new hammers.

Did you already reshape / file the hammers? Answer: Yes, I shaped them so the have a good point on the strike point. This helped the sound. I also smoothed out the strike point with fine sand paper. 

Have you leveled the strings and mated the hammers to them? Answer: Yes, strings are leveled and hammers are mated to the strings. Also, the strike weight of the hammer, front weight of the key, and DW/UW/BW have been refined. Notes have been well regulated.

The Fazioli method is pre-needling in the 9 to 10:30 range and equivalent on the other side 3 o'clock to 130. that pre-needling tends to open up the hammer and increase the overall dynamic range. Out of the box, with cupping, usually those hammers are squared first with sandpaper.  Needling above 1030 or 130 is to address mid range dynamics (downward), and closer to the crown, to reduce excessive brightness and work the pianissimo range. 

Some hammers will develop over time if you have the time. But waiting a couple of years for most pianists is not something they want to do and if the piano is not played a good number of hours every day it'll take longer than that.  

Generally, I'm not a fan of needling up the center of the hammer to take out the cupping. If the belief is that tension has been released at the side of the hammer when they're cut apart, not an unreasonable assumption, then the question would be, why would you want to release tension and bring down the center of the hammer when the problem is usually that the hammer is too weak?   Better to file away the somewhat dead and felt that is responsible for the cupping.  

My preference is to put the hammers in a hammer vice before you do anything, file the hammers to remove the cupping from the top and square the top of the hammer. Polish it down to a very fine grit with maybe 800 or 1000 paper.  

If it's a firmer pressed hammer like a Renner style hammer then you'll want to use a three needle tool and needle in the low shoulder, 9 to 1030 on both sides, and count stitches. You might do that before you file so you can remove the needle marks.  Usually you'll need six or eight stitches in the bass hammers and progressively fewer as you go up to treble. Needles should be 8 to 10 mms, #5 or #6. That procedure on a firmer hammer can increase power to a point. 

On a Ronsen Hammer, I'm not sure you benefit from pre-needling in terms of increasing dynamic range but you might a little bit. Don't go above 1030 or 130 though otherwise the hammer will start going the other way.  I generally think it's better to give the hammers a little bit of a head start, even if it's a fairly light stiffening solution. A drop or two on the crown might be required as well in the bass and treble.  

But without the Piano in front of me and goals clearly outlined, it's really hard to comment. That's just the general procedure. 

Ben, Here are the answers to your questions:

 Are these new hammers or have they been worn in already? Answer: They are new hammers.

Did you already reshape / file the hammers? Answer: Yes, I shaped them so the have a good point on the strike point. This helped the sound. I also smoothed out the strike point with fine sand paper. 

Have you leveled the strings and mated the hammers to them? Answer: Yes, strings are leveled and hammers are mated to the strings. Also, the strike weight of the hammer, front weight of the key, and DW/UW/BW have been refined. Notes have been well regulated.

Well, that's a good question and you'll get lots of different answers depending on who wishes to weigh in. There are several options. My own preferences for the old Pianotek product called HammerLac. Unfortunately Schaff has decided to discontinue the product and even so refuses to share the original supplier so that others might pursue having it manufactured. Short of that,  there is regular Steinway hammer lacquer which you can buy from Walter Wurdack. There is of course B 72 and there are other products as well. They all accomplish the same thing, though they have somewhat different signatures. If you don't have a product of choice, then I would recommend you experiment with varying strengths to see what is suitable. The only way to gain experience is unfortunately through experience.

The Fazioli method is pre-needling in the 9 to 10:30 range and equivalent on the other side 3 o'clock to 130. that pre-needling tends to open up the hammer and increase the overall dynamic range. Out of the box, with cupping, usually those hammers are squared first with sandpaper.  Needling above 1030 or 130 is to address mid range dynamics (downward), and closer to the crown, to reduce excessive brightness and work the pianissimo range. 

Some hammers will develop over time if you have the time. But waiting a couple of years for most pianists is not something they want to do and if the piano is not played a good number of hours every day it'll take longer than that.  

Generally, I'm not a fan of needling up the center of the hammer to take out the cupping. If the belief is that tension has been released at the side of the hammer when they're cut apart, not an unreasonable assumption, then the question would be, why would you want to release tension and bring down the center of the hammer when the problem is usually that the hammer is too weak?   Better to file away the somewhat dead and felt that is responsible for the cupping.  

My preference is to put the hammers in a hammer vice before you do anything, file the hammers to remove the cupping from the top and square the top of the hammer. Polish it down to a very fine grit with maybe 800 or 1000 paper.  

If it's a firmer pressed hammer like a Renner style hammer then you'll want to use a three needle tool and needle in the low shoulder, 9 to 1030 on both sides, and count stitches. You might do that before you file so you can remove the needle marks.  Usually you'll need six or eight stitches in the bass hammers and progressively fewer as you go up to treble. Needles should be 8 to 10 mms, #5 or #6. That procedure on a firmer hammer can increase power to a point. 

On a Ronsen Hammer, I'm not sure you benefit from pre-needling in terms of increasing dynamic range but you might a little bit. Don't go above 1030 or 130 though otherwise the hammer will start going the other way.  I generally think it's better to give the hammers a little bit of a head start, even if it's a fairly light stiffening solution. A drop or two on the crown might be required as well in the bass and treble.  

But without the Piano in front of me and goals clearly outlined, it's really hard to comment. That's just the general procedure. 

Ben, Here are the answers to your questions:

 Are these new hammers or have they been worn in already? Answer: They are new hammers.

Did you already reshape / file the hammers? Answer: Yes, I shaped them so the have a good point on the strike point. This helped the sound. I also smoothed out the strike point with fine sand paper. 

Have you leveled the strings and mated the hammers to them? Answer: Yes, strings are leveled and hammers are mated to the strings. Also, the strike weight of the hammer, front weight of the key, and DW/UW/BW have been refined. Notes have been well regulated.

The Fazioli method is pre-needling in the 9 to 10:30 range and equivalent on the other side 3 o'clock to 130. that pre-needling tends to open up the hammer and increase the overall dynamic range. Out of the box, with cupping, usually those hammers are squared first with sandpaper.  Needling above 1030 or 130 is to address mid range dynamics (downward), and closer to the crown, to reduce excessive brightness and work the pianissimo range. 

Some hammers will develop over time if you have the time. But waiting a couple of years for most pianists is not something they want to do and if the piano is not played a good number of hours every day it'll take longer than that.  

Generally, I'm not a fan of needling up the center of the hammer to take out the cupping. If the belief is that tension has been released at the side of the hammer when they're cut apart, not an unreasonable assumption, then the question would be, why would you want to release tension and bring down the center of the hammer when the problem is usually that the hammer is too weak?   Better to file away the somewhat dead and felt that is responsible for the cupping.  

My preference is to put the hammers in a hammer vice before you do anything, file the hammers to remove the cupping from the top and square the top of the hammer. Polish it down to a very fine grit with maybe 800 or 1000 paper.  

If it's a firmer pressed hammer like a Renner style hammer then you'll want to use a three needle tool and needle in the low shoulder, 9 to 1030 on both sides, and count stitches. You might do that before you file so you can remove the needle marks.  Usually you'll need six or eight stitches in the bass hammers and progressively fewer as you go up to treble. Needles should be 8 to 10 mms, #5 or #6. That procedure on a firmer hammer can increase power to a point. 

On a Ronsen Hammer, I'm not sure you benefit from pre-needling in terms of increasing dynamic range but you might a little bit. Don't go above 1030 or 130 though otherwise the hammer will start going the other way.  I generally think it's better to give the hammers a little bit of a head start, even if it's a fairly light stiffening solution. A drop or two on the crown might be required as well in the bass and treble.  

But without the Piano in front of me and goals clearly outlined, it's really hard to comment. That's just the general procedure. 

Ben, Here are the answers to your questions:

 Are these new hammers or have they been worn in already? Answer: They are new hammers.

Did you already reshape / file the hammers? Answer: Yes, I shaped them so the have a good point on the strike point. This helped the sound. I also smoothed out the strike point with fine sand paper. 

Have you leveled the strings and mated the hammers to them? Answer: Yes, strings are leveled and hammers are mated to the strings. Also, the strike weight of the hammer, front weight of the key, and DW/UW/BW have been refined. Notes have been well regulated.

Joseph,

Being thousands of miles from the piano, I can't give you specific advice on how to manipulate the hammer felt, but you may want to consider that the problem is not the hammer but the tension in the soundboard. The soundboard on any 1920's piano would be suspect of crown loss. Try changing hammers from another area of the action. If the problem continues, then the culprit may be the soundboard.  

------------------------------
Roger Gable RPT
Gable Piano
Everett WA
(425) 252-5000
------------------------------

Thanks everybody for all your various suggestions. I will try them. I like the idea of thinking of the various frequencies/partials that a hammer creates as "partial energy", meaning that the hammer will create energy in a certain partial range depending on the densities of the felt in certain parts of the hammer. I will very carefully make one change at a time with needling or applying B72 and keep track of the changes. I will report back as to what the results are. 

But first I am going to check the tightness of the legs to the piano and experiment with isolating the leg connection from the body of the piano with a thin piece of felt, as Peter Grey and I have discussed in the past. it will be interesting to hear if this changes the vibrational pattern of the piano enough to alter the results that are heard from a hammer blow.

As far as dealing with the effects of older soundboards on particular notes, it brings to mind the work that Jim Iallegio has been doing, trying mass loading of the soundboard with magnets and other techniques. I have attended presentations at his workshop and have heard the changes that soundboard mass loading can make. Perhaps I will experiment with this if I am not able to fix problems by voicing hammers. 

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
www.fmi-newengland.com
------------------------------


Original Message:
Sent: 09-08-2026 10:16
From: Roger Gable
Subject: How do I change the Frequency/Partial profile of Ronsend Weickert Felt Hammers?

Joseph,

Being thousands of miles from the piano, I can't give you specific advice on how to manipulate the hammer felt, but you may want to consider that the problem is not the hammer but the tension in the soundboard. The soundboard on any 1920's piano would be suspect of crown loss. Try changing hammers from another area of the action. If the problem continues, then the culprit may be the soundboard.  

------------------------------
Roger Gable RPT
Gable Piano
Everett WA
(425) 252-5000
------------------------------

I'm going to stick my neck out and say that I don't think the legs are going to  have much to do with what you're hearing

I will be interested to hear if Jim responds to the mass loading question. I have my own thoughts about that situation but I will be interested to hear him weigh in. Keep in mind that the mass loading that Jim is doing to my understanding is on new soundboards where he is modifying the designs. These would be anything but what you would find as to the impedance characteristics of an old soundboard. If Jim is making his boards a bit on the stiffer side then mass loading to slow the board down or lower the resonant frequency makes sense. On an old soundboard where you want added stiffness so that the board can actually vibrate faster to produce high frequency energy mass loading will do just the opposite and I would guess would not solve the problem for you

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


Original Message:
Sent: 09-09-2026 15:28
From: Joseph Burros
Subject: How do I change the Frequency/Partial profile of Ronsend Weickert Felt Hammers?

Thanks everybody for all your various suggestions. I will try them. I like the idea of thinking of the various frequencies/partials that a hammer creates as "partial energy", meaning that the hammer will create energy in a certain partial range depending on the densities of the felt in certain parts of the hammer. I will very carefully make one change at a time with needling or applying B72 and keep track of the changes. I will report back as to what the results are. 

But first I am going to check the tightness of the legs to the piano and experiment with isolating the leg connection from the body of the piano with a thin piece of felt, as Peter Grey and I have discussed in the past. it will be interesting to hear if this changes the vibrational pattern of the piano enough to alter the results that are heard from a hammer blow.

As far as dealing with the effects of older soundboards on particular notes, it brings to mind the work that Jim Iallegio has been doing, trying mass loading of the soundboard with magnets and other techniques. I have attended presentations at his workshop and have heard the changes that soundboard mass loading can make. Perhaps I will experiment with this if I am not able to fix problems by voicing hammers. 

------------------------------
Joe Burros
Cell: 646-410-7174
jbcello@gmail.com
www.fmi-newengland.com
------------------------------



Original Message:
Sent: 09-08-2026 10:16
From: Roger Gable
Subject: How do I change the Frequency/Partial profile of Ronsend Weickert Felt Hammers?

Joseph,

Being thousands of miles from the piano, I can't give you specific advice on how to manipulate the hammer felt, but you may want to consider that the problem is not the hammer but the tension in the soundboard. The soundboard on any 1920's piano would be suspect of crown loss. Try changing hammers from another area of the action. If the problem continues, then the culprit may be the soundboard.  

------------------------------
Roger Gable RPT
Gable Piano
Everett WA
(425) 252-5000
------------------------------