S&S replacing Hammer Assemblies with new

[Farrell]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
"It means getting a new hammer that weighs exactly as much as the =
original."

And what was the evaluation process that led you to the conclusion that =
the original weight was optimal? And was the original weight optimal for =
the piano when it was new? Would the original hammer weight and hammer =
felt density be optimal for the 90 year old piano? Are all the =
properties of the 90 year old compression crowned soundboard exactly the =
same as they were when it was new?

I'm not saying that hammers with characteristics of the originals won't =
be the best thing for it, but I also think that a hammer with some =
different characteristics it is a legitimate consideration given that =
the rest of the piano is not likely to be just as it was when new.

Terry Farrell
  Yes but the immediate problem you get is when you replace the original =
hammers as well, because in this case the weight of the hammers is very =
crucial.
  It means getting a new hammer that weighs exactly as much as the =
original.
  There is no hammer maker who produces exactly that hammer, so you have =
to modify a new set of hammers and you have to almost ruin that new set =
of hammers to get back to the original weight.
  I have seen many attempts to do so and they all looked ridiculous, the =
tails were still too long and in the end they were still too heavy =
anyway because the materials used nowadays are different and weigh more =
than the original hammers of which for instance the original felt was =
much less dense than VFG felt Abel uses.
  More lead in the keys will complete the usual and well known =
catastrophe.

  Andr=E9 Oorebeek

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/36/52/8c/af/attachment.htm

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