I think the issue being discussed has less to do with shear volume than it does with the ability to change the balance of how the partials develop depending on how you strike the note. This may be related to the consistency of the hammer mostly, however the requirement for the consistency of the hammer is related to the belly and what it will tolerate. Back to the first point, consider the classic description of a hammer as an iron fist in a velvet glove. Not a great description really when you consider things like resilience and flexibility but one thing that it suggests is that once compressed beyond that velvety outer layer the hammer should be able to influence the relative amplitude of the different partials in such a way that you can get a brighter attack and sharply accented notes that stand out in contrast. This is done to some degree by having a hammer where the consistency changes considerably below the outer layers. Perhaps there's a better or even more accurate way to explain it. A concert instrument that employs a full dynamic range doesn't do so by just being able to play from loud to soft, it does so by being able to influence brightness and contrast by the manner in which the note is struck and the hammer is compressed to harder layers that lie below the surface. If you produce a belly that wants for a softer hammer deeper into the core then you will lose that ability to some degree. If you lose it enough you will diminish the expressive range of the instrument. It's that same ability that allows the piano to cut through other instruments with a concerto piano, though that's an extreme case where you have a hard time turning it off. But in most regular concert situations, when the piano is voiced well and has that particular dynamic range, you can broaden the tonal pallet that way. With respect to these redesigns, at least the ones that I have been involved with, the issue of hard hammer tolerance has been discussed frequently, if not publicly then privately. But it's a real issue if what you're after is what I have described. That's been my experience with these so far and while it isn't an issue much of the time, in this particular case (concert stage type of instrument) it is. When executed properly, they produce a beautiful and controlled sound. But the need for a hammer with that particular soft consistency limits the expressive potential. A few comments have been made about the Overs piano but if you look at the hammer on that piano it was nothing like the hammers that are going on these designs that we're talking about. It was a massive, Abel performance hammer. Very firm in its core along with a very high strike weight. The belly of the Overs piano was very different in its weighting and hammer requirements. While they both employ some similar features, I don't think you can really compare the two in terms of panel characteristics or rib scales. David Love www.davidlovepianos.com
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC