voicing new hammers

[David Love]

I don't think I've ever heard a new hammer that couldn't be significantly
improved by voicing.  Though tastes in tone may seem to vary, I think there
are objective criteria in the performance of hammers.  The fundamental
objective criteria is resilience.  Though it is difficult to quantify, it
can clearly be heard.  New hammers of the Renner or Abel type tend to lack
it and so benefit from shoulder needling at the least.  So reliable is this
phase that it can be done prior to hammer installation.  The resilience can
be felt by squeezing the shoulder of the hammer and can be heard in the
openness of the tone.  Steinway hammers, on the other hand, lack resilience
because they are too soft and some additional firmness/density/stiffness
needs to be built into the felt to keep the hammer from mushing against the
strings and killing the tone.  So reliable is this phase that you could
almost prelacquer them prior to installation.  In fact, it makes filing them
a bit easier.

Realistically I can't see any reason for leaving a Renner/Abel type hammer
unresilient, or a Steinway type hammer too soft.  The result is that I
always perform these operations with good and perceivable results.

Attack is another thing.  There is plenty of room for differences in taste
along this spectrum and I always work with the customer to determine where
they like it.

I think that it's very easy to talk yourself into thinking that a new set of
hammers sounds fine when you first put them in.  There's a bit of psychology
at work I think.  All of us want to be able to plug the action in and walk
away.  I would love to have a set of hammers where the density and
resilience was controllable in manufacturing from note 1-88 so that I didn't
have to do anything but install them.  Unfortunately, it seems that the
asymmetric consistency needed to produce optimum tone in a hammer combined
with the inherent differences in even the highest quality felt (differences
are much greater in lesser quality felt) puts this beyond the scope of the
manufacturing process at present.   I think there are some manufacturers
that are doing a better job of felt selection and processing than others.
In spite of the fact that I do use Steinway hammers and like the sound that
they produce, I think Renner does a better job in terms of consistency,
especially with the Renner Blue.

As in anything, taste is learned, and sold.  If you only eat at MacDonalds,
In n Out Burger seems like haute cuisine de bouef.

David Love


----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Moody" <remoody@midstatesd.net>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: August 10, 2002 11:14 PM
Subject: voicing new hammers



I don't believe in voicing new hammers for the sake of voicing.

Yet it can be demonstrated that new hammers on a new piano respond
greatly to voicing. (deep needling)  for example as seen in the
all day Kawai class at the National convention.

But not always so for new hammers on an old piano.

Of course  you played the piano before.   Now play the piano with
the new raw hammers.  Then make your decision.  The method of
replacing alternate hammers should really show the differences. If
the new hammers sound much better what are you voicing for?   If
you think you can get a better sound by voicing those new hammers
are you expecting pay for your time?   So if you do not get a
better sound do you still ask to get paid?   Or if only a slightly
better sound only slightly more money?

>From the voicing lessons I received in training and attending
voicing classes at national conventions, (OK only two) the voicing
of new hammers is still a subjective matter based on what sound
the technician deems best for the instrument.  Some hammers "out
of the box" sounded great and then after much needling still
sounded great.  The "lesson" (to me at least) was why voice?  On
the other hand for another  piano, some sounded good but sounded
better after voicing.   The lesson there, "glad to know I can get
a better sound from a new hammer by stabbing needles into it".
Yes certain brands have a tendency to need "pre voicing"   Other
brands and be expected to sound great right out of the box.  Which
brands these are will be endorsed by "leading" technicians on this
list.

    If the hammer sounds as good as you expect or better why
voice?  In the hopes of sound better?  (such hubris) You may want
it to sound better but you might find out all the needling in the
world only made it slightly better, or worse depending on two
different ears.   I say leave it and evaluate the voicing after 6
months.   (actually after so many hours of playing in a six month
time. )

---ricm


> > I replaced the hammers on a similar Baldwin a couple of years
ago with
> > Renner.  The client was ecstatic with the results, and wanted
no further
> > voicing at all!
> >
> >
> > Ray T. Bentley, RPT
> > Registered Piano Tuner-Technician
> > Alton, IL



> >
> >             Hi  Ray
>
>            I say this with all due respect. While I'm aware this
happens and
> I guess the customers is always right since as it is there
piano, but that
> doesnt' mean the piano was producing  its optimal tone. It may
mean that the
> raw hammer was producing a better sound than what wa  heard
before and had
> they trusted your judgement a bit firther they would have had
something
> perhaps even more thrilling. I wonder if the treble is by now
producing the
> sounds of shattering glass or perhaps if you got a softer set of
renners as I
> did years ago. These are quality hammers but the ones I've seen
in recent
> years always needed  voicing especially in the money notes(5 and
6 octaves)
>     Do you know if the client is still ecstatic?
>           Best-----Dale
>