I didn't see it as a debate rather an attempt to define terms. I can fully understand not wanting to work with lacquer in hammers. I would prefer to find a hammer that required no such additives except maybe at the very extremes (top and/or bottom). Up until now most hammers, in my view, were either hard or soft. Not much in the middle. But a hammer that requires 100 stitches on each side in order to arrive at the desired consistency, in my view, either isn't made that well or chosen that well, one of the two. I do wish there were more choices in the medium range where a handful of stitches on either side was all that was necessary. I would prefer that over the use of lacquer but prefer the modest use of lacquer over 100 stitches per side. There are now a couple coming closer to that but few. While I like the Weikert and Wurzen felt hammers from Ronsen they are soft for many applications and too soft for some people's taste admittedly (it is ultimately a custom(er) choice). Personally, I don't mind that a hammer takes awhile to develop and most of my customers don't either. If the use of the piano is such that it's not played frequently enough or vigorously enough to develop that last 10-15% then I don't mind pushing it up there, but I'd rather not. As I mentioned, when they are allowed to develop for that last bit I think they sound better and the voicing is more stable, but that's my opinion. I've seen techs who want to soak the firm Renner and Abel hammers with lacquer to achieve their immediate power needs. I'm just not there with that particular aesthetic and neither are many (if any) of my customers. So the discussion, to me, is more to do with defining exactly what "power" is and, moreover, what the trade off is. You can't have it all. To get something you give up something. I don't believe that you can achieve the maximum power along with the most delicate pianissimo. If you shoot for maximum power you will raise the lowest level of your pianissimo and if you choose the most delicate pianissimo you will sacrifice some upper end power. On a scale of 1-10 you don't get to choose the whole range. It's 1-7 or 3-10 or 2-8 or something like that. Further, with many pianos aiming for ultimate power simply creates ultimate distortion at the upper levels or noise. The purpose for discussions like this, then, is for the readers who are still wrestling with which direction to go, wondering what's out there in terms of all the hammer choices that are presented, what they will deliver and what the up and downside might be for those choices. The discussion is more about that than offering an opinion on what you should put on your own piano. That, of course, is entirely up to you. David Love www.davidlovepianos.com From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Brian Wilson Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 4:09 PM To: pianotech at ptg.org Subject: Re: [pianotech] choice of hammers Dale and David, Thanks for your replies. I will try to keep this short. David, I agree that hammers do change, I was pointing to the fact that there is service work to be performed after installation and playing. Same as servicing a new piano. And yes, there are many inpenetrable hammers out there which we have to try and service. Dale, you are correct that I am not that experienced in voicing softer styles of hammers. That is a cultural differnce in our work, which I find refreshing. We all know that whatever technique we apply to a hammer, being needles or lacquer, it affects the sound. You are used to building up the tone, and your ear accepts the felt plus hardener sound. I find the lacquer to add a certain sound. The building up of tone plus hardener would maybe help with some of the problems I encounter with hammers in humid climates. However just as you have encountered problems with hard pressed hammers, I have encountered lacquered hammers that would be best descrbed as rocks. Unvoiceable to me. The German hammers which I described in an earlier post can be improved by adding lacquer in different areas. Adding lacquer in the staple area will help with the fortissimo, whilst the playing in will help with the other "holes in the sound". With other hammers with a harder staple (pressed) area and a little more firm all over, I can perform voicing as I have been taught and achieve the result I am looking for. My initial request was for a hammer that was for my own piano, however it is a search to find hammers that I can use on other pianos.. i.e customers. I did not want a hammer that I had to soak to achieve a better sound. I tried as much as possible not to suggest that lacquer is against my internal beliefs. My exposure to hammers and voicing is from the traditional German methods. I did learn some "hammerkopf lack" techniques from these methods, however voicing with needles has been my main technique.I have no problem in hitting a hammer 100 times each side with 3x7mm size 6 needles, some this list would be horrified. I am open to new ideas with softer hammers, hence my first request. I also live with "you get what you pay for". May I also add a quote "the ear is trained by what it hears most of" or something very close to that. As much as the factories assume that we WILL voice their pianos, they will also discuss different ways of hiding flammable hammer hardener in luggage for air travel. David and Dale, although this thread may have been seem to be a debate, I have found it informative and as also provided differences in rebuilding techniques and culture. I do try extremely hard to choose words that may not be taken out of context. A face to face discussion would be fun. Enjoy your Sunday and regards Brian -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech.php/attachments/20091205/70ff57f7/attachment.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC