<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1"> <title></title> </head> <body> S&S hammers:  facts or rumors? 1.  Hamburg Steinway concert grands now have a lower plate height which matches the rest of the the Hamburg Steinway models.  Therefore, Hamburg hammers do no fit on New York D's.  I ran into this last summer because we have a New York D, fitted with Hamburg parts (Renner).  It was a C&A piano (the parts must have been put on in the basement of Steinway Hall).   We bought it before it made it back to NY from Aspen a couple of years ago.  I wasn't involved in the purchase (the hammers were already pretty far gone by the time we got the instrument; they even included a free set of hammers with the purchase).  The piano faculty liked the piano the way it was but the Hamburg hammers I got with the piano were way too short.  I hung them anyway with good results, but the geometry is off.   2.  Steinway designs it's action geometry so that the hammers should over center.  The idea is that on a hard blow the shank flexes so much that when the hammer hits, it will be at 90 degrees to the string.  On a soft blow, however, the hammer will overcenter.  Has anyone heard anything about this?  It's news to me.  There seems to be some logic to it, but it's hard for me to believe Steinway assembly processes  will produce consistent adherence to the design specs.  I've seen hammer centerlines on Steinways and some of them ain't pretty. 3.  How can you dope the shoulders of a hammer and not have it wick across the crown?  My experience is that if you don't get enough dope on the first application, you may never get the piano out of the mellow range.  Not enough dope creates what Steinway calls a "shell" that prevents penetration of second or third applications of laquer if it is needed.  At least this is what they claim in the recent tech sheet that was sent out from Steinway to techs around the country.  Any comment on that publication? Richard West, U of NE Jeff Tanner wrote: <blockquote type="cite" cite="midl03110701ba5ee3f7b594@%5B129.252.210.124%5D"> <pre wrap="">Are the Steinway hammers not still available undoped? My predecessor told me that when he ordered hammers, they gave him a choice of mellow, medium, or bright prevoicing from the factory. With no budget, I haven't ordered any, so I don't know. I must say though, I have seen a set of the new hammers and they are beautifully shaped -- unlike previous offerings. And Kent Webb claimed that they are consistently so. Another newby for S&S hammers is longer tails. They've increased tail length by 1/8", I believe it is, and checking is now possible at less than 1/2" - not that that is necessarily a desireable goal, but would certainly come in handy after they've been filed a few times. Regarding weight, I was at a November presentation by Eric Schandall, and my recollection is that the new action geometry accepts heavier hammers without increasing touchweight, which should produce fuller tone. Obviously, if you aren't changing action parts, that could create a problem. I've got 11 S&S Bs here at the school, manufacture dates ca 1993. There are amazing differences in hammer size and weight from piano to piano. Our piano chair has extremely small, light hammers on his busiest B, and it creates a lot of problems with tone and regulation. Next to it, the action and tone are much better thanks to larger heavier hammers. Naturally, the students prefer the lighter action, and he prefers the one which offers more resistance. If the new hammers were on these pianos, it would be an improvement. I seem to recall also that Kent and Eric both said that if you are not satisfied with new Steinway parts, return them, no hassle, and they will make them good. They are also now getting orders out within 24 hours (though the guarantee is 48), which is also a dramatic improvement over the Steinway parts department of old. My thoughts. Jeff Dale Irwin wrote: </pre> <blockquote type="cite"> <pre wrap="">. Hi Ed The pre juicing of factory hammers is old news to be sure and its OK up the thin line one doesn't wish to crossover but it would be nice if more quality control were possible. I don't think it is. I'm working with a S&S D and an L both with new boards etc. The D hammers were very heavy. 12.9 grams to start at note 1, note 40 about 9.5 to start. I have new set of keys in each with dialed in key leverages otherwise I'd be installing shanks with 17 mm knuckles. The D hammers had some nice round sound note 1 thru 52 then they got more wooly then the last octave was really dull. Top octave and half got a total 3 to 1 saturation of lacquer. they sound fine. Everything got a soaking. The low bass monos got 3 to 1, bichords 6 to 1 , Tenor about 6 to 1. Ist capo 3 to one. I've got enough punch and noise to needle back som! e The top three hammers I just dunked in a 1 to 1 solution. Now they sound fine as well. It's obvious that the hammers are fairly well juiced out of the box which can be determined by sticking a needle here and there. I think the answer to your question about voicing stability is usage. How much, how hard. Acoustics ,desires. Ed I know you've been round this track before. I think the answer for me would be to bore three hammers when they come in. Note 16, 40 and 64. This is probably all we need to know. Listen to them. Hey if there over juiced Plug the holes send them go back. Why should we pay for defective products. Yes I consider that defective especially at 400 bucks a pop. The L hammers were no problem. Reasonable amounts of lacquer. When there right they're really good and when there bad well.... Best---Dale Erwin The STeinway hammers are now arriving from the factory pre-doped. I have had two sets in the last month and they were not at all the same! The first, for a model A, were large enough to put on a D, and they were already crystal-bright, <sigh> The customer was having me replace the hammers because they were too brassy, so I ended up needling the heck out of a new set of hammers. They felt like sugar cubes. Since I do my own boring, there was no way to really tell what they sounded like before crossing the drill-press Rubicon. The next set was soft, but I think they will play-in very nicely, (though I do need to help the low bass out a little, sniff-sniff). So, my question is this. In a heavy use setting, like on the school stages, how long does a new set of these things last before becoming difficult to keep a round sound? Has anybody "rinsed" a new set with acetone or something to take some of the sting out before the accupuncture? My normal doping of new Steinway hammers used to begin with a side application of 6:1 that was heavy enough to just reach the core right about at the tip of the molding. Then I could listen and add more a little farther up the shoulder to get what I wanted. This left me with a small wedge of unlacquered felt under the strike point that would, with about 20 hours of playing, really give me a broad range of tone, from a defined mellowness at pp to an orchestral crash at full FFF. Not only that, but I could keep it that way through several filings and reshaping! I fear that with the new procedure up there in New York, which I understand to be soaking the entire hammer set with 4:1 before shipping, this malleability and control will be lost. Anybody have a set that is aging and can tell me where these new ones go? Thanks, Ed Foote RPT </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap=""> _______________________________________________ caut list info: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives">https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives</a> </pre> </blockquote> </body> </html>