<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; =
charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2>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. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>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 = 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. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>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. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>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.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Those are my thoughts. Feel free to
comment.</FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2><BR>David Love</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>