To be or not to be: a heavy hammer

[David Love]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
Of course, it is all a matter of degree.  I am talking about the benefit =
of #1 hammer weighing in at 10 grams as opposed to 12 grams.   A =
refelted hammer as you describe probably weighs in at 8 grams.  At such =
a light weight the increase in acceleration cannot compensate for such a =
difference in mass.

David Love
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Isaac OLEG=20
  To: Pianotech=20
  Sent: October 03, 2002 12:09 AM
  Subject: RE: To be or not to be: a heavy hammer


  While I tend to believe that concert instruments will benefit of =
hammers in the "high" zone of the chart, I see that the flexing of the =
shank add velocity to the hammer too.=20

  Lighter hammers tend to produce a cleaner sound , but my impression, =
because of the so large mass of every other part of the piano, is that =
they will give less low partials, as noticed on the re felted hammers I =
meet sometime.

  It is just a choice in the wanted tone I guess.

  To have the Glengould tone we will not need heavy hammers at all, but =
Arthur Rubinstein would be sad of a too light one I guess.

  Then it is also a board question if I understand well, but I am still =
to hear the boards made by certain builders. If CD are available I'd be =
interested.

  S&S hammers are going on a lighter side actually, but I believe these =
are economic reasons too unfortunately (predict wear in 10years).

  I'll think of it

  regards.

  Isaac O..

    -----Message d'origine-----
    De : pianotech-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org]De =
la part de David Love
    Envoy=E9 : jeudi 3 octobre 2002 07:26
    =C0 : Pianotech
    Objet : To be or not to be: a heavy hammer


    The question was put to me off list about why I reject the idea that =
heavier hammers are necessary on a concert instrument.  I thought I =
would put my reply on list because I think it is an interesting =
discussion. =20

    The practice of putting heavier hammers on a concert instrument =
comes from the idea that more mass will produce greater force and =
therefore greater volume of tone.  But mass is only part of the =
equation.  Force =3D mass x acceleration.  While it is true that if =
hammers of varying weights are accelerated equally, the one with more =
mass will have more force, it is also true that a hammer of lower mass =
will be accelerated to a higher velocity more easily.  This is =
especially true in a piano where lower mass in the hammer results in =
lower inertia at the hammer end as well as in the key.  Whether you have =
more mass and less acceleration or more acceleration and less mass, as =
long as the mass of the lighter hammer is not so much less that its =
deficiency cannot be compensated for by increased acceleration, the =
potential force in the two examples can be equal. =20

    Because pianos are played from pppp to ffff, the only area of =
concern is in the potential force at the highest end.  You don't benefit =
from a more massive hammer at the pppp level.  In fact, since there is a =
point below which soft playing cannot be reliably controlled, a lighter =
hammer will give greater dynamic range at the bottom end.  So the only =
concern is at the top end.  Assuming that the difference in hammer =
weight can be compensated for by greater acceleration, the heavier =
hammer will actually have a narrower dynamic range. =20

    As I already mentioned,  a lighter hammer will reap benefits in =
terms of lower inertia both due to lower hammer weight and lower front =
weight of the keys.  Lighter hammers will rebound off the strings more =
quickly increasing sustain and improving clarity.  Lighter hammers will =
also allow you to maintain an action ratio that doesn't require =
compromises of key dip, blow or both.   One final concern with very =
heavy hammers is the deflection of the shank at high level of =
acceleration.  Though I haven't looked into the research in any great =
detail, I know that Renner has given this a lot of consideration in the =
design of their shanks.  If, in trying to accelerate a very heavy hammer =
to high levels, the shank deflects to the point that the hammer is =
striking fairly far from top dead center, how much force and tonal =
quality are we losing because of this and, therefore, is there any real =
benefit to trying to increase the upper range limit anyway.

    Those are my thoughts.  Feel free to comment.=20


    David Love

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/21/04/78/25/attachment.htm

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--