hammers

David M. Porritt dm.porritt@verizon.net
Mon, 02 Jun 2003 18:54:42 -0500


Andre:

Having read your take on hammers I have a question.  I have a church
here that has a Bechstein "EN" concert grand, but it was built back
when the had 88 agraffes.  I need to replace the hammers, but the top
octave really needs very thin hammers in order to fit between the
belly rail and still not hit the agraffes.  You stated that
Bechsteins that have pointy hammers sound bad.  Any
suggestions????????

dave

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 6/2/2003 at 10:04 PM antares@euronet.nl wrote:

>On maandag, jun 2, 2003, at 11:03 Europe/Amsterdam, Dave Nereson
wrote:
>>  
>>     What??  The Steinways I've seen have always had an
egg-shaped 
>> hammer.  Aren't we sposeta file trying to remove only one layer
of 
>> felt, or enough to remove the string grooves, without changing the

>> shape of the whole hammer (unless it's a grossly misshapen mess
due to 
>> someone else's botch job)? 
>
>Alright Dave, my explanation..........
>
>Let me first state the following : I have only limited experience
with 
>Steinways built in New York, so the Steinways I am talking about are

>Hamburg Steinways and they ARE different.
>The Steinways built in Hamburg have Renner hammers with Wurzen felt.
>Those hammers are very round from the beginning and after first
voicing 
>they are filed into a diamond shape, and much more 'diamondy' then
you 
>(or I) would have imagined (it is actually frightening at first to
see 
>how small a STW becomes after first filing.
>This filing process is pretty extreme, but it does give the STW's a 
>certain 'edge' and brilliance you won't get if you leave them 
>un-diamond-filed.
>
>
>>     And why would a Bechstein change for the worse with a 
>> diamond-shaped hammer? 
>
>Because certain instruments ask for a hammer shape that causes more
or 
>less overtones.
>The Bechstein grand piano does not ask for a hammer which causes
extra 
>brilliancy as the instrument itself  already has a certain type of
high 
>overtone sound. Give it more or too much, and you will make it an
ugly 
>yelling monster with a pierced and shrill voice.
>
>
>>  
>>     At Yamaha's Little Red Schoolhouse, they explained that
Yamaha 
>> purposely shapes their hammers with more of a diamond- than an 
>> egg-shape. 
>
>Sure, but look at the older type Yamaha's please and the hammers you

>order for those instruments. You will notice that they are round and

>pear shaped from the beginning.
>The hammers for Yamaha's started to change into a more diamondy
shape 
>with the introduction of the CFIII-S and at the same the
introduction 
>of the Wurzen felt, mind you.
>The Wurzen felt is a much different kind of felt than the felt
Yamaha 
>uses on the  regular - not hand made - models. It causes a different

>tone and asks for a different treatment too. I can tell you this 
>because I had (private)  lessons in Wurzen felt voicing in the
Yamaha 
>CFIII-S department (within the factory), the Steinway factory in 
>Hamburg and the Bechstein factory in Berlin.
>(At one time I met the technical director of Yamaha in Hamburg -
Herr 
>Professor Dokter Lüdemann (ja ja) - and I proudlu told him about
'my 
>discovery' of the 'new' Wurzen felt, to which he sneered by telling
me 
>that already some time ago he had made the same discovery and that 
>already they had proto-type CFIII-S actions with Wurzen hammers!
Later 
>that year, while being in Hamburg, he summoned me to a secret place 
>where he showed me one of those 'Wurzen hammer' actions.
>At Yamaha they are now changing there hammers because they have also

>changed their models. Those things go hand in hand.
>
>
>>     Are we saying that if the felt is on the soft side
(Steinway, 
>> especially early ones, and even late ones, compared to Asian
hammers), 
>> it will compress too much on a hard blow, flattening out and 
>> cancelling partials, giving a dull tone, so we should file them
to 
>> more of a diamond shape?  How do you do that without cutting
across 
>> layers of felt in the hammer? 
>
>There is difference in felt making between felt makers. One of the 
>hammer makers pre-sands its hammers and makes its felt is much and
much 
>more dense. This causes a brilliant tone from the beginning but
after a 
>year or two the instruments quickly lose their erstwhile beauty
because 
>the fibers in the hammers, which were much more massed up together
in 
>the first place (and thereby lost a lot of their natural resilience)

>become kind of hard thudding dead clonkers, to be replaced as soon
as 
>possible. Those clonkers are dead lumps if felt, there is no more 
>'life' in them.
>I have experience with those clonkers for instance on Fazioli's and 
>Seilers.
>Especially one Fazioli concert grand (and initially a nice Seiler
too) 
>I remember very well. It was a gift from, I think, a bank to a brand

>new Theater somewhere here in Holland. The Fazioli became -
extremely - 
>ugly within 3 years and was given away!, to be replaced by a brand
new 
>Steinway D (although I wish that I could have heard/played one of
Ron 
>Overs' grands as he is, according to me, one of the leading piano 
>makers in the world).
>The Wurzen felt is not sanded from the beginning and the highly 
>resilient felt layers stay intact, causing the same very lively tone

>that the early Steinways had in earlier days.
>
>>     And if the felt is dense (Asian and others) and already 
>> diamond-shaped (Yamaha and other Asian pianos), then it should
have a 
>> richer tone because it does not flatten out and cancel
partials?  But 
>> you said YAM's change for the worse with a
diamond shape.   What do 
>> you mean, "change"?  They already have the diamond shape....???
>
>YAM's change for the worse if you re-shape their hammers as if they
are 
>modern (Hamburg) STW's. Why? because it alters the tone in the wrong

>way. The tone becomes overstrained and hyper, with the emphasis on
the 
>higher partials which the Yamaha does not need as they are already 
>pretty brilliant. If we take the development of Yamaha's into 
>consideration we may notice that the early Yamaha's were shrill and 
>tinkly instruments. They clearly were accepted by the Japanese 
>consumers (at the time) but Yamaha had to adapt to a more 'Western 
>taste' of listening, which, over the years, resulted in a neutral
kind 
>of Steinway clone, but without the 'boom' and richness of said STW. 
>(they are built completely different in the end and have gone their
own 
>way)
>In my perception of, and experience with, piano sounds, the shape of
a 
>hammer has to adapt to the characteristics of a soundboard. The 
>soundboard (and the strings), asks for a certain 'commotion', by in 
>fact a very specific kind of hammer strike, that will cause it to
sound 
>in such a way that we as listeners will like and thus approve of. A 
>Bechstein with a sharp protruding diamond shape hammers will
definitely 
>sound different than with a more rounded off, egg shaped, hammer. A
STW 
>with a Bechstein hammer will sound a little dull, without the
specific 
>STW brilliance and color gradation we expect from it. A
Bösendorfer 
>with a STW hammer will 'speak too loud' and thereby lose its
romantic 
>harmonics.
>A Fazioli would definitely be a more interesting instrument,
musically 
>speaking, with Wurzen hammers. One of the much heard complaints
about 
>Fazioli's is that they sound so very loud and too uniform, without
any 
>change of 'color', which makes especially Bechsteins and
Bösendorfers 
>so attractive and magically divers.
>Instead, the Fazioli maker wishes for his instruments to SOUND and 
>SOUND, as it were to prove that a Fazioli has unlimited power, just 
>like, or even more, than a Steinway.
>A Yamaha CFIII-S basically does not give that same avalanche of 
>loudness although they may 'thunder' (the legendary S. Richter for 
>instance on a unique instrument built for him only. They have become

>more subtle because they have, just like the others, a long history
of 
>piano making behind them and an adapted taste. That's exactly why a
YAM 
>CFIII-S 'can be' magnificent, masterly, and truly satisfying because

>the instrument is balanced and rightly developed. They brought
together 
>the right materials and they have learned through experience how to 
>treat those materials.
>I am more than convinced that Fazioli eventually will find its true 
>course. I am definitely not saying that Fazioli is a mediocre 
>instrument, on the contrary! They have, I think, a great deal of 
>possibilities and technically speaking they are superb. It is just a

>matter of more time.
>
>Some Asian piano makers (I am not talking about Yamaha and Kawai)
also 
>have not found their true course. The Koreans are rapidly developing

>ways to flood the World with even more low cost pianos. I was there
in 
>the Samick factories in Incheon and Djakarta and I was amazed by the

>speed and the quantities of instruments leaving the factory(great 
>guitars too). They basically have good material (Wurzen hammers from

>Renner, soundboards from Italy, Keyboards from Germany), but they
still 
>have to find a stable course. Maybe Bechstein (50% take over) will
be 
>of great influence? The Chinese make all the stuff in the World.
They 
>make literally everything and they make it in a very inexpensive
way. I 
>have seen, and worked on, several Chinese 'Perzina' uprights.
>They amazed me by their already reasonable quality but they still
have 
>a long time to go, unless they can buy the right people for a lot of

>dollares to make very fast  competitive changes.
>
>Anyway....my little story turned out a little longer than expected.
>Hopefully it made any sense at all?
>
>Antares,
>The Netherlands
>
>see my website at : www.concertpianoservice.nl
>
>
>
>On maandag, jun 2, 2003, at 11:03 Europe/Amsterdam, Dave Nereson
wrote:
>
><excerpt> 
>
>    What??  The Steinways I've seen have always had an
egg-shaped
>hammer.  Aren't we sposeta file trying to remove only one layer of
>felt, or enough to remove the string grooves, without changing the
>shape of the whole hammer (unless it's a grossly misshapen mess due
to
>someone else's botch job)? 
>
></excerpt>
>
>Alright Dave, my explanation..........
>
>
>Let me first state the following : I have only limited experience
with
>Steinways built in New York, so the Steinways I am talking about are
>Hamburg Steinways and they ARE different.
>
>The Steinways built in Hamburg have Renner hammers with Wurzen felt.

>
>Those hammers are very round from the beginning and after first
>voicing they are filed into a diamond shape, and much more
'diamondy'
>then you (or I) would have imagined (it is actually frightening at
>first to see how small a STW becomes after first filing. 
>
>This filing process is pretty extreme, but it does give the STW's a
>certain 'edge' and brilliance you won't get if you leave them
>un-diamond-filed.
>
>
>
><excerpt>    And why would a Bechstein change for the worse
with a
>diamond-shaped hammer? 
>
></excerpt>
>
>Because certain instruments ask for a hammer shape that causes more
or
>less overtones.
>
>The Bechstein grand piano does not ask for a hammer which causes
extra
>brilliancy as the instrument itself  already has a certain type of
>high overtone sound. Give it more or too much, and you will make it
an
>ugly yelling monster with a pierced and shrill voice.
>
>
>
><excerpt> 
>
>    At Yamaha's Little Red Schoolhouse, they explained that
Yamaha
>purposely shapes their hammers with more of a diamond- than an
>egg-shape. 
>
></excerpt>
>
>Sure, but look at the older type Yamaha's please and the hammers you
>order for those instruments. You will notice that they are round and
>pear shaped from the beginning.
>
>The hammers for Yamaha's started to change into a more diamondy
shape
>with the introduction of the CFIII-S and at the same the
introduction
>of the Wurzen felt, mind you.
>
>The Wurzen felt is a much different kind of felt than the felt
Yamaha
>uses on the  regular - not hand made - models. It causes a different
>tone and asks for a different treatment too. I can tell you this
>because I had (private)  lessons in Wurzen felt voicing in the
Yamaha
>CFIII-S department (within the factory), the Steinway factory in
>Hamburg and the Bechstein factory in Berlin.
>
>(At one time I met the technical director of Yamaha in Hamburg -
Herr
>Professor Dokter Lüdemann (ja ja) - and I proudlu told him about
'my
>discovery' of the 'new' Wurzen felt, to which he sneered by telling
me
>that already some time ago he had made the same discovery and that
>already they had proto-type CFIII-S actions with Wurzen hammers!
Later
>that year, while being in Hamburg, he summoned me to a secret place
>where he showed me one of those 'Wurzen hammer' actions.
>
>At Yamaha they are now changing there hammers because they have also
>changed their models. Those things go hand in hand.
>
>
>
><excerpt>    Are we saying that if the felt is on the soft
side
>(Steinway, especially early ones, and even late ones, compared to
>Asian hammers), it will compress too much on a hard blow, flattening
>out and cancelling partials, giving a dull tone, so we should file
>them to more of a diamond shape?  How do you do that without
cutting
>across layers of felt in the hammer? 
>
></excerpt>
>
>There is difference in felt making between felt makers. One of the
>hammer makers pre-sands its hammers and makes its felt is much and
>much more dense. This causes a brilliant tone from the beginning but
>after a year or two the instruments quickly lose their erstwhile
>beauty because the fibers in the hammers, which were much more
massed
>up together in the first place (and thereby lost a lot of their
>natural resilience) become kind of hard thudding dead clonkers, to
be
>replaced as soon as possible. Those clonkers are dead lumps if felt,
>there is no more 'life' in them.
>
>I have experience with those clonkers for instance on Fazioli's and
>Seilers.
>
>Especially one Fazioli concert grand (and initially a nice Seiler
too)
>I remember very well. It was a gift from, I think, a bank to a brand
>new Theater somewhere here in Holland. The Fazioli became -
extremely
>- ugly within 3 years and was given away!, to be replaced by a brand
>new Steinway D (although I wish that I could have heard/played one
of
>Ron Overs' grands as he is, according to me, one of the leading
piano
>makers in the world).
>
>The Wurzen felt is not sanded from the beginning and the highly
>resilient felt layers stay intact, causing the same very lively tone
>that the early Steinways had in earlier days.
>
>
><excerpt>    And if the felt is dense (Asian and others) and
already
>diamond-shaped (Yamaha and other Asian pianos), then it should have
a
>richer tone because it does not flatten out and cancel partials? 
But
>you said YAM's change for the worse with a
diamond shape.   What do
>you mean, "change"?  They already have the diamond shape....???
>
></excerpt>
>
>YAM's change for the worse if you re-shape their hammers as if they
>are modern (Hamburg) STW's. Why? because it alters the tone in the
>wrong way. The tone becomes overstrained and hyper, with the
emphasis
>on the higher partials which the Yamaha does not need as they are
>already pretty brilliant. If we take the development of Yamaha's
into
>consideration we may notice that the early Yamaha's were shrill and
>tinkly instruments. They clearly were accepted by the Japanese
>consumers (at the time) but Yamaha had to adapt to a more 'Western
>taste' of listening, which, over the years, resulted in a neutral
kind
>of Steinway clone, but without the 'boom' and richness of said STW.
>(they are built completely different in the end and have gone their
>own way)
>
>In my perception of, and experience with, piano sounds, the shape of
a
>hammer has to adapt to the characteristics of a soundboard. The
>soundboard (and the strings), asks for a certain 'commotion', by in
>fact a very specific kind of hammer strike, that will cause it to
>sound in such a way that we as listeners will like and thus approve
>of. A Bechstein with a sharp protruding diamond shape hammers will
>definitely sound different than with a more rounded off, egg shaped,
>hammer. A STW with a Bechstein hammer will sound a little dull,
>without the specific STW brilliance and color gradation we expect
from
>it. A Bösendorfer with a STW hammer will 'speak too loud' and
thereby
>lose its romantic harmonics.
>
>A Fazioli would definitely be a more interesting instrument,
musically
>speaking, with Wurzen hammers. One of the much heard complaints
about
>Fazioli's is that they sound so very loud and too uniform, without
any
>change of 'color', which makes especially Bechsteins and
Bösendorfers
>so attractive and magically divers.
>
>Instead, the Fazioli maker wishes for his instruments to SOUND and
>SOUND, as it were to prove that a Fazioli has unlimited power, just
>like, or even more, than a Steinway.
>
>A Yamaha CFIII-S basically does not give that same avalanche of
>loudness although they may 'thunder' (the legendary S. Richter for
>instance on a unique instrument built for him only. They have become
>more subtle because they have, just like the others, a long history
of
>piano making behind them and an adapted taste. That's exactly why a
>YAM CFIII-S 'can be' magnificent, masterly, and truly satisfying
>because the instrument is balanced and rightly developed. They
brought
>together the right materials and they have learned through
experience
>how to treat those materials.
>
>I am more than convinced that Fazioli eventually will find its true
>course. I am definitely not saying that Fazioli is a mediocre
>instrument, on the contrary! They have, I think, a great deal of
>possibilities and technically speaking they are superb. It is just a
>matter of more time.
>
>
>Some Asian piano makers (I am not talking about Yamaha and Kawai) 
>also have not found their true course. The Koreans are rapidly
>developing ways to flood the World with even more low cost pianos. I
>was there in the Samick factories in Incheon and Djakarta and I was
>amazed by the speed and the quantities of instruments leaving the
>factory(great guitars too). They basically have good material
(Wurzen
>hammers from Renner, soundboards from Italy, Keyboards from
Germany),
>but they still have to find a stable course. Maybe Bechstein (50%
take
>over) will be of great influence? The Chinese make all the stuff in
>the World. They make literally everything and they make it in a very
>inexpensive way. I have seen, and worked on, several Chinese
'Perzina'
>uprights.
>
>They amazed me by their already reasonable quality but they still
have
>a long time to go, unless they can buy the right people for a lot of
>dollares to make very fast  competitive changes.
>
>
>Anyway....my little story turned out a little longer than expected.
>
>Hopefully it made any sense at all?
>
>
>Antares,
>
>The Netherlands
>
>
>see my website at : www.concertpianoservice.nl

**************** END MESSAGE FROM  antares@euronet.nl
*********************
_____________________________
David M. Porritt
dporritt@mail.smu.edu
Meadows School of the Arts
Southern Methodist University
Dallas, TX 75275
_____________________________



This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC