Felt quality

[Richard Brekne]

David.

You yourself have mentioned several times that you could not quite get 
the same sound from Wurzens as Bacons on C.Walter instruments. These are 
hammers that are vastly more similar from the get go then hammers that 
need needling down vs hammers that require lacquer to build power.  How 
then do you find it difficult to accept that there is a clear 
qualitative difference between a lacquered hammer and a non lacquered 
hammer regardless of how much you work either ?

I have to agree with Steinway themselves, folks like Andre Oorebeck, 
John Patton, Eric Schandall, Jan Hoppner, and all the folks at 3 
different acadamies I've attended.  Lacquered hammers and non lacquered 
hammers will end up sounding different no matter what you do.  In fact 
that is the real reason (tho perhaps not the origional) Steinway NY uses 
lacquer.  Those boys tell me it is not easier... if anything a bit more 
time consuming.

Interesting that you point to a lack of stability in lacquered hammers. 
Dale E. I believe takes the opposite tact here... as did the fellows who 
spoke on the matter this summer at Oberlin.  Clearly this is a subject 
matter that there is no real quantitative study done on.

Cheers
RicB



        Yes and no.  I think it's slightly more complicated.  A Steinway
        hammer
        which is so soft that it requires a full immersion is different
        than a
        slightly soft hammer that may need reinforcement only on the
        non-string-contact part of the hammer.  I'm not sure that it's
        that easy to
        tell the difference or that in the later case the sound is
        qualitatively
        different from a non-lacquered hammer--at least at the outset. 
        Of course, a
        hammer which is softer to begin with will have a different sound
        than one
        that is harder to begin with (especially between molding and
        crown) but
        since the harder hammer is often needled down and the softer
        hammer requires
        some playing time to develop properly, the ultimate difference
        may be
        negligible and the lacquer, at least when applied to the
        shoulder area only,
        may not provide a substantial difference.  At least that's my
        experience.
        Over time may be another story as the lacquer continues to
        harden and the
        shoulders lose some flexibility.  That's my main complaint.  Of
        course, when
        you do need to harden the hammer under or onto the strike point
        I believe
        that does change the character and even more so in terms of how
        the hammer
        ages.  

        David Love
        davidlovepianos at comcast.net
        www.davidlovepianos.com



    JD / Dale

    And here you have the real reason for doping hammers.  Its a matter of
    taste... purely subjective in nature and if done well will produce very
    nice results that are somewhat different in end resulting sound.

    There used to be a lot of folks trying to justify doping hammers by
    asserting that you could get the same sound as needled hammers.  I am
    glad I dont hear this kind of thing anymore myself, because it really
    isnt true to begin with, and secondly... who should need such a
    justification to begin with ? Steinway NY states outright that they
    dont
    get the sound they want without using soft hammers built up with
    lacquer.

    Dale and I have had many a talk on this subject and tho we have
    different preferences... I'm know for a fact he gets a very nice sound
    out of his approach.

    In the end... regardless of the strong opinions any of us hold... piano
    voice and response is a very subjective thing that has nothing at
    all to
    do with what the instrument was designed to do... what level of
    loudness/harshness  or softeness/mellowness is achieved.  One persons
    noise is anothers heavenly harp.

    Cheers
    RicB