Light, light, hammers

[stanwood]

Hi folks,

I would like to give a balanced view regarding the use of light, light hammers.
Today I recieved an action from a major Symphony Orchestra.  The piano is a
Steinway D with weight reduced Ronson 14# hammers with Sapele moldings.  The
piano has nice tone but nobody will use the piano because the tone just
doesn't cut it.  Just not enough energy there.  If ultra light hammers work
miracles then we would see them in general use and we don't.  The are plenty
of great sounding pianos out there that have full weight hammers.

When I hear that woody sound it tells me that the shoulders and sublayers of
felt need to be stiffer.   It takes more skill to voice a heavier hammer so
that it bounces of the string more quickly enough to creat a full balanced
tone, especially if your timid and inexperienced in the application of
hardening agents.

The following is a letter that was published in response to an article in
Piano & Keyboard Magazine:

ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
Timothy Pfaff - Editor
Piano and Keyboard Magazine

Dear Mr. Pfaff,                                  11/18/93

Your recent publication of a letter by Edward N. Zalta, in the 
November/December issue of Piano and Keyboard Magazine, 
regarding Ed McMorrow's "Light Hammer Technique", touches upon 
several controversial points, which, for the benefit and 
education of your readers, should be addressed.

It is a point of debate whether the newer Steinways "sound as 
good, or play as well as well preserved older ones".  I take the 
view that if there is a general fault with the modern piano, it 
lies not in the weight of the modern hammer, but the lack of 
piano technicians who are skilled in the art of voicing the 
modern hammer.  A piano that is not voiced up to full steam will 
not play well.  Consequently the whole piano is thought to be 
inferior.

For a time, I personally followed the light hammer road, 
believing in many of the lines of logic that McMorrow exposes.  
But I have listened to what a large number of professional 
pianists tell me and they have taught otherwise.  I have learned 
that the stripped down light hammer produces a tone which does 
not carry adequately, especially in ensemble situations.  The 
tonal requirements of the 20th century demand a more massive 
hammer.  The modern weight hammer such as that used by Steinway 
today is the result of many decades of trial and error, finding 
just the right weight of hammer that brings out the maximum 
potential of the modern instrument.  The modern weight hammer 
simply has a bigger sound than its antique counterpart.

McMorrow contrasts his technique with my technique, and clearly 
implies that I do not take the tone into account when dealing 
with the touch.  This is false and misleading.  The philosophy 
of my techniques are based on the synergistic relationship 
between tone and touch, with tone taking the dominant role.

In contrast to McMorrows technique, whereby the weight of the 
hammer is sacrificed to "match the period of the string", my 
technique gets a similar effect, but I do not sacrifice the 
bigger sound of the modern hammer.  Let me explain:

The ideal hammer produces a bright and powerful tone when played 
loudly, and a velvety mellow tone when played softly.  The 
varied tonal mix that is possible in between these two extremes 
gives the pianist a wide choice of tonal color.

I achieve this voicing ideal by using techniques which maintain 
maximum softness and resiliency at the surface of the hammer, 
making the sublayers of felt progressively harder.  The distance 
from the surface of the hammer to a point within where maximum 
hardness is attained, I call the "Gradient Zone".  Within the 
Gradient Zone are contained a wide range of felt densities which 
help to create a wide range of tonal color.

There is significant variation in the resonant qualities of 
individual pianos. The trick is to match the Gradient Zone with 
the unique characteristics of the individual instrument.  Pianos 
which are highly resonant achieve maximum tonal quality with a 
deeper Gradient Zone.  Pianos which are less resonant require 
treatment that creates a shallower zone with the hard sublayers 
of felt closer to the surface.  When the ideal Gradient Zone is 
attained; the tone immediately opens, becoming "pure and 
bell-like", with limitless variations of tonal shades available 
to the pianist.

Regarding the action, McMorrow fails to address the central 
issue of lever ratio in the piano key.  This relates to the 
speed at which the hammer rises when the key is depressed.  The 
lighter hammers common in the 19th century are used in 
conjunction with actions which have less leverage, and therefore 
the hammer moves more quickly as the key is depressed.  The 
heavier hammers of today require more leverage to catapult them 
to the string.  The modern style action is made such that the 
hammers rise more slowly in relation to key depression.
The slower moving, heavier hammer of today delivers more energy 
to the string than the faster moving light hammer of the last 
century.

The combination of lever ratio and hammer weight governs the 
characteristic feeling of the action.  Unfortunately there 
exists wide variation in lever ratios found in pianos from any 
period.  This creates problems.  For instance, using a light, 
antique weight hammer with the modern style lever ratios is not 
recommended since the lower velocity combined with less mass 
will transmit insufficient energy to the string.  The action 
will feel too light, and the pianist will feel frustrated when 
trying to get a big sound.  Conversely, modern weight hammers 
used with older style lever ratios will make the action feel 
heavy, difficult to control, and may cause physical harm to the 
pianist.

Today, the concert pianist performs on a nonstandardized 
instrument.  As a friend put it, "performing on tour is like a 
string of blind dates", referring to the variety of pianos she 
is required to perform on.  Aside from voicing, action is the 
major problem.  It is either too light, too heavy, or too 
unresponsive,... sometimes it's just right.  My vision is 
standardization of hammer weight and lever ratio, because it 
strikes at the core of the problem.

One final point: I agree that pianists can tolerate the high 
touchweight that McMorrow accepts in his work.  However, 
pianists repeatedly tell me that they find high touchweight a 
hindrance when playing pianissimo, and a barrier when playing 
glissando.

- David C. Stanwood
-----------------------------------------------------------------
            David C. Stanwood-Stanwood@tiac.net            
            West Tisbury, Massachusetts     USA    
            On the Island of  Martha's Vineyard  
            http://www.tiac.net/users/stanwood/

"The art in hammer making has ever been to obtain a solid,
 firm foundation, graduating in softness and elasticity toward 
 the top surface, which latter has to be silky and elastic in 
 order to produce a mild, soft tone for pianissimo playing, but
 with sufficient resistace back of it to permit the hard blow of 
 fortissimo playing."                 - Alfred Dolge 1911
-----------------------------------------------------------------