Tapering Hammerheads using Plane

[John Delacour]

On 30/03/2013 21:19, David Love wrote:

> I think I'll take the hand plane and the risk of a few shaved fingers.

I think you'd do better, and _never_ shave a finger, if you used the sort of plane I use, the Stanley A78 or equivalent and _pulled_ the hammer-head, head first, over the blade.  I set the plane so I achieve the desired tapering with about eight pulls per side.  There is no need for any special pusher or holder.

JD

[David Love]

I use a shallow angle plane and it works well but often I'm taking down the entire length of the hammer so my fingers do pass over the blade. Were I just doing a taper of the wood it would be less of a problem.

David Love

www.davidlovepianos.com

415.407.8320

[Isaac OLEG]

the name of the wood block used to support the head and provide a reference is a "boite a recaler" , same principle as for planing shims . I cannot see how you can make trapezoidal heads without a jig to plane.

[David Love]

I should add to my last post that I normally use a table saw with a Renner jig for tapering as it is fast and clean and allows easy tapering of the full length of the hammer. I only use the hand plane to make fine adjustments later if needed. Most of the time it's not.

David Love

www.davidlovepianos.com

415.407.8320

[David Love]

As I mentioned, my normal method for tapering hammers and hitting a specific weight on each hammer is shown in the photo attached.  I prefer this over the hand plane method for the first go.  It’s done in one pass on each side, can taper the full length of the hammer quickly and easily or can be set up to just to the tail if that’s the preference.  It’s clean and uniform and requires no measurement or comparative checks once the jig is set to the right amount of material to take off, easily adjustable.  Just go through the set.  This tool is in commonly used here (US) for that purpose.  Only when I have to adjust the weight after hanging the hammers do I go to the hand plane method.  Typically I taper the hammers from the tip of the molding back to the tail.  The actual width of the final taper will depend on a specific target weight for each hammer. 

 

These jigs can be purchased from Renner.  Their new one has a nice handle and holds two hammers at once. 

 

David Love

www.davidlovepianos.com

[Isaac OLEG]

Yes This is a very good jig, but to tapet bass hammers the plane is better. I did not thaught it was possible (easily) to taper full lenght with a plane, but if it is possible on glued hammers this is good news. I will make a "box" to do so with more force and a firm support.

[Isaac OLEG]

Spurlock jig, you mean , one of the many tools I have received from him.

[Isaac OLEG]

For the tails I use that gig but on a large sander, it is faster

[David Love]

Yes, Spurlock. I don't like the sander. Makes a mess of the felt, visually.

David Love

www.davidlovepianos.com

415.407.8320

[John Delacour]

On 30/03/2013 23:02, David Love wrote:

> I use a shallow angle plane and it works well but often I'm taking
> down the entire length of the hammer so my fingers do pass over the
> blade. Were I just doing a taper of the wood it would be less of a
> problem.

You don't need to copy the whole thread including pictures every time
you reply to a message! You do it every time.

I see no advantage in a shallow angle plane, quite the contrary; and I
also am taking down the entire length of the hammer. So long as the
hammerhead is held the right way there is no danger. With the sort of
plane you are using you are also in difficulty of the head is attached
to a shank. Don't knock it before you've tried it.

As to sanding and sawing, not for me thank you. As you say sanding
leave the hammers looking awful. The hammers on Steinways have looked
awful for decades. That's no reason for me to sink to their level.

JD

[David Love]

I'm not knocking anything.  I have tried the plane and prefer the table saw. Thank you.  Others are free to do as they wish.

I'll try to do better trimming the posts commander.  If the previous trash is still there it's perhaps that those before me have failed as well. I don't "copy" anything. Nor do I bother scroll down endlessly to see if others have.

David Love

www.davidlovepianos.com

415.407.8320

John Delacour <J...@Pianomaker.co.uk> wrote:

On 30/03/2013 23:02, David Love wrote:

> I use a shallow angle plane and it works well but often I'm taking

> down the entire length of the hammer so my fingers do pass over the

> blade. Were I just doing a taper of the wood it would be less of a

> problem.

You don't need to copy the whole thread including pictures every time

you reply to a message!  You do it every time.

I see no advantage in a shallow angle plane, quite the contrary; and I

also am taking down the entire length of the hammer.  So long as the

hammerhead is held the right way there is no danger. With the sort of

plane you are using you are also in difficulty of the head is attached

to a shank.  Don't knock it before you've tried it.

Snip...

[Isaac OLEG]

There is a difference when writing on a cell phone, the threads are collapsed so reading is not that hard. But it takes much time to load due to multiple pics ...
On a computer, strangely it can be more a mess.

On the cell phone I also do not have the green button that copy tge whole thread in the answer (?)

Then, I miss a spell checker ...

[Isaac OLEG]

The brown traces on sides of old Steinways (walnut or kotibe molodings) are not clean, I agree. They also use a torch to burn protuberating fibers..
In the end what I need is a piano with qualities as musical instrument , we do not look at the hammers when playing. I like them to have a nice shape, obtained with voicing, a good felt , an astute gluing on good models. Long enough tails, correct weight, pressing that provide a nice rebound for Ffff and does not call for impregnation absolutely.

I like the gig to be used with my precision table saw, but it cannot cut the felt for travelling when necessary.

Indeed hammers cannot be planned all along with a sander without looking dirty and even ugly !

For the tails, up to the agrafe, it stay accepteable to me, but as I often need to take off more weight I will give a try to the plane method.

What is the theory for more angled blade ? I could use the plane used for scraping the surfaces prior to gluing, if there is an advantage to it. (the angle is quite strong there) . I use a long and heavy Stanley or such jobs usually (the other is in wood and with a good handle so it should be easier to use if the angle is OK .

I suggest that a strong angle is better for softer materials, I was surprised that my special planes with thin angle (to work end of the grain) are not so good for felt ...

[Isaac OLEG]

I have such a plane, did not try it fo felt. I will post results.

[Isaac OLEG]

Cant you leave the hammer  only hold by the jig ? My saw blade move along or stay fixed (can be inclined also) 

Lenghtening the lever of the jig should be enough to be safe

Le dimanche 31 mars 2013 00:02:54 UTC+1, David Love a écrit :

[David Love]

If you are referring to the spurlock jig, yes, of course you can. If you are referring to the table saw method with the shank attached, I don't see how that is held by the jig alone which is why I wouldn't do it.

With respect to this now exhausted topic, I'm not interested in having an argument about which method is better. Using the spurlock jig I can taper the sides of the hammer in one 'pull" on each side safely, predictably and cleanly and can taper through the felt portion with no trouble or effort. If someone wants to use a hand plane, whichever kind, that requires eight pulls on each side that is entirely their business how they wish to spend their time. Tradition has no interest to me for its own sake if it is less efficient.

David Love

www.davidlovepianos.com

[Al Guecia/Allied PianoCraft]

On Mar 31, 2013, at 10:59 AM, David Love <davidlo...@comcast.net> wrote:

Using the spurlock jig I can taper the sides of the hammer in one 'pull" on each side safely, predictably and cleanly and can taper through the felt portion with no trouble or effort.

Fully agree! There is no safer, easier or more accurate way to taper hammers, tails or both at the same time.

Al -

High Point, NC

[Isaac OLEG]

David I am not trying to argu in any manner, just want to understand what is the best plane type  for hammer felt. 

That is mostly to thin hammers yet glued, or to make the bass thinning that is necessary on Bechsteins or some models

I tryed my "scraper" plane, the angle is too straight there, but I seem to nunderstand that to cut a soft material the blade must be somewhat agressive to avoid being pushed by the felt.

I make a great use of the Spurlok gig. one allowing to cut 2 hammers at once is a good idea , and one to work with the hammer glued even better.

I am wondering if the precision is not slightly better with a moving saw, but in the end no particular reason for that (it is mostly less noisy as the saw turns only when I pull the handle) 

Greetings

[David Love]

No, you were not. It was not directed at you. The holding box is nice. I would still use a low angled plane but the table saw is faster for me. 

The double hammer holding jig is made by Renner. The one I showed was made by Spurlock.

David Love

www.davidlovepianos.com

On Mar 31, 2013, at 11:19 AM, Isaac OLEG <isaac...@gmail.com> wrote:

David I am not trying to argu in any manner, just want to understand what is the best plane type  for hammer felt. 

That is mostly to thin hammers yet glued, or to make the bass thinning that is necessary on Bechsteins or some models

I tryed my "scraper" plane, the angle is too straight there, but I seem to nunderstand that to cut a soft material the blade must be somewhat agressive to avoid being pushed by the felt.

I make a great use of the Spurlok gig. one allowing to cut 2 hammers at once is a good idea , and one to work with the hammer glued even better.

[Ron Overs]

Hi David,

I agree that sanding will result with wood dust in the felt, but it can be blown clean with compressed air provided the paper on the sander is very sharp. It is the method we use.

Below is an image of hammers being hung which were tapered with disc sander then blown clean. The core wood in this case is Walnut.

Regards,
Ron O.

-- 

OVERS PIANOS - SYDNEY

   Grand Piano Manufacturers

_______________________

Web http://overspianos.com.au

mailto:r...@overspianos.com.au

_______________________

A web page with images of recent work and almost-audio-CD quality mp3 sound files of the Overs piano can be found at;

http://overspianos.com.au/more_info.htm

So put on your headphones, plug them into your freshly restarted computer and sit back to over 20 minutes of pure piano.

 _______________________

[Zirc...@aol.com]

Hi Ron,

 

Assuming you are happy with those hammers on the Bechstein B, whose are they and what sort of weight?  I want to replace on a 1928 Bechstein B.

 

Thanks,

 

Richard

[Ron Overs]

Richard,

Was very happy with the result. I've included a jpg image of two charts showing the hammer weights. The bottom chart shows the hammer weights as measured straight from the pack. We chose the extra hammers to reject, by eliminating those with the biggest weight deviation from the mean hammer weight curve (so the bottom chart shows the 88 hammers which survived the cull). The hammers we used were Abel with cold pressed felt. Very little voicing was required. However, because we were fitting them to a Bechstein, we needed to do some fairly serious hammer thinning in the top before hanging, to achieve plate clearance (we got stuck into the plate with a grinder also, before re-doing the plate finish, to help the hammer clearance). Unfortunately this set had staples (which I don't like much on any hammer), so we had to remove them before thinning. I used a small orbital sander to get the bulk removed, then finished them by hand.

The top chart shows the hammers (hung) after balancing. This piano got a new bass string design without altering the original speaking lengths, and a new 6 note bi-chord tenor bridge with relocated agraffes (to get rid of the 'hockey stick'). The original tied action was replaced with a standard Schwander style wippen, with custom wippen heels positioned to suit the new capstan position, and to a depth of 16mm (custom work courtesy of Tokiwa). This resulted in a suitable action ratio for a 10.25 key dip and 45 mm hammer blow distance. When setting the ratio we adjust the capstan position on the key and wippen heel depth until the jack only just clears the knuckle when the hammer is in check.

If you are going to re-do a 1928 B you'll need to do something about the board stiffness unless you are changing it altogether. There is no way that a Bechstein board of this age will have adequate stiffness without some work (and shims alone will achieve virtually nothing).

Below are the charts. The units on the left side of the charts is weight in grams.

Ron O.

Assuming you are happy with those hammers on the Bechstein B, whose are they and what sort of weight?  I want to replace on a 1928 Bechstein B.

 

Thanks,

 

Richard

[David Love]

Ron:

 

I’m interested to see the shape of that curve as it comports with my own current  thinking about strike weight curves and the weight range at either end as well.  The weight in the treble doesn’t need to change much  between pianos of different impedance quality even though sets produced by hammer makers tend to follow the same slope just raising the weight bar through the set.  I can see you had to do quite a bit of work to reduce the weight in the upper end of your piano.

 

These are the three basic curves that I use for hammers (these include the hammer plus shank weight (SW).  The choice will depend on the piano and it’s specific needs.  There are other considerations in the hammer which I won’t go into here.  It’s much more of a straight line rather than the typical SW curves currently promoted.  You can see there is very little difference at the very top of the scale and the difference is more pronounced in the bass where certain pianos will benefit from more mass.  In actual practice these curves flatten out some at the bass end, as you can see, over the last 8 notes or so.  It appears that yours do as well.  I’ve left your charts on as a comparison.   Your curve on this Bechstein matches very closely my upper end weight zone. 

 

 

David Love

 

Strike weight zones—David Love (includes hammer and shank weight)

 

 

[David Love]

BTW, as a follow up comment, people would benefit immensely from hammer selection if they would get it out of their heads that the make of the piano has little to do with the choice of hammer.  The specific requirements of the piano itself, soundboard impedance especially, will be the largest determining factor.  That and the scale.  Even with the same model piano, especially with soundboard replacement on one and not the other, the soundboard impedance character will be vastly different and requirements as well.

 

David Love

www.davidlovepianos.com

[Isaac OLEG]

Hello, Mr Overs, was it difficult to obtain that very sharp molding ? you did send samples ? The hammers look nice., more in the actual Bechstein shape than what was employed at the times, but I like underfelt up to 88. (not sure that type of molding is on the calalogs)

I wonder the reason to retain the whippen type. is it just because of the 9 mm roller ? could you please tell where do you like the older design whippens .

Is it possible to you to buy directly from Tokiwa ? I liked their shanks I have seen on a Steinway. 

You seem to use no overblow (you may have find quite a lot originally , is not it ?)

Do you have somthing about overblow/underblow use, in regard of the shank/dynamics ? sorry for much questioning. I wonder if you have some new ideas on the subject ..

The moment where the "compression/release" moments occur during the blow are by evidence modified with different ways of installing the hammers, providing different levels of acceleration but mostly different compression curve within the system.

The older uncentered tail was not a bad idea, inertia wise, at Bechstein times , in my opinion.

Did you record that Bechstein ?I would be very pleased to hear the result. 

is changing the crown by the side a good stiffening method ? I remind a Grotrian Steinway with soundboard tension system in the cutoff , while I never heard the result unfortunately , I suppose it could help to avoid bridge roll to some point.

Greetings

[Isaac OLEG]

David, two things come to mind 

1° the voicing differs depending of the shape, and the scaling; Brand have much to do with hammer shape and kind of voicing conduted, if one want to retain the tone signature.

2° hammer mass may accept a hop simply trying to provide more power where our ears are less efficient .above 1000 Hz etc )  I suggest that the string's lenght is  of course playing a role there.

how do you see that ? Indeed the tone characteristics are today more similar from piano to piano than ever.But I cannot think of a Bechtein tone as of a Steinway, nor a Boesendorfer, Steingraeber, etc...took me some time just to understadn how to raise the Bechstein characteristic tone. final voicing is often very similar but the original felt shape and molding shape i are helping to get the resiliency more concentrated on some portion of the hammer more than on another. I for instance replaced STeinway heads that where fitted on a Boesendorfer, and have seenn that done on other brands as well always with a loss of the original type of tone.

Greetings

[Isaac OLEG]

Le lundi 1 avril 2013 16:38:52 UTC+2, David Love a écrit :

BTW, as a follow up comment, people would benefit immensely from hammer selection if they would get it out of their heads that the make of the piano has little to do with the choice of hammer.  

May be I understood you wrongly ...

Regards 

[Dale Erwin]

This is all very true David. You & I have talked about this a great deal privately and your most recent class is one that has been long over due addressing this very subject.

  Hammer choice based on soundboard requirements, acoustic requirements and customer preference should be prioritized IMO in that order. That being said how would you advise a technician to proceed in hammer choice when he or she may have very little experience with the amazing and fantastic myriad of excellent hammer choices available today?  How can they avoid the pit fall of" I think I'll try that hammer" and see what happens? The point is, you and I, and many on  this list have a great deal of hammer selection experience to guide us in this and even so sometimes we're not entirely happy with the chocie we made. Right?

 SO my concern is  for the rookie or even not so rookie in that they may be struggling to make a right choice for their clients with a certain amount of anxiety and concern for the outcome of the job. 

  Being that's the case, it is  my opinion that it is a good idea to consult with people who can give guidance on this. I think many of us on list would be open to private consultation to those who would welcome a more sage and experienced recommendations. Know what I mean?  I think many of us are willing volunteers. I will.  Any othesr who want to humbly sign on here to be an advisor just post back and those who need assistance can call or write  privately.

This has been a very useful discussion all.

 Kindest regards

Dale Erwin-Erwins Piano Restoration

WWW.Erwinspiano.com

209-577-8397

Modesto,Calif.

[Joseph Garrett]

Dale,

Excellent idea. I'd be willing to do that. Of course, I am very biased on the hammers I choose and use, as are most rebuilders I suspect.<G

Best,

Joe

 

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Dale Erwin

To: pian...@googlegroups.com

Sent: 4/1/2013 8:18:26 AM

Subject: Re: [ptech] Tapering Hammerheads using Plane

[Dale Erwin]

Excellent Joe.

   There are reason for our bias and thats ok, but with the worldwide tonal pendulum swinging in our cumulative direction there are many hammer choices and having a few folks who use a variety of hammers to consult with is a fantastic resource. 

   Most on this list know I use and sell Ronsen hammers of course but having a hand in developing the Weickert felt I have also used the Renner version and it is a fine hammer for many applications. Also the Abels are paying attention with their cold pressing ideas they got from Ray.

 I have posted specific hammer application experiences over the past and perhaps more of us can do that as well. 

Dale

Dale Erwin-Erwins Piano Restoration

WWW.Erwinspiano.com

209-577-8397

Modesto,Calif.

[Isaac OLEG]

For what I have seen most of you does not use the bottom of the hammers, possibly because you want maximum output near the crown, but little impact noise (which is not really avoidable on "hot" pressed hammers.

The recent Weickert is indeed a must, and Jack Brand may have a medal (in chocolate, it is Easter after all) for being so attentive to produce again a quality felt for our makers.

I tend also to believe that most US techs use a standard approach to hammer bore/orientation. probably always chasing for the old American tone (which I appreciate well) 

This may or may not be a mistake, I know a tech that want to offer "the French" tone to any piano he preps.with so so results (cutting the g... to any piano was the words employed by a colleague) .

We have today different types of hammers and different types of voicing we can use.  Determining what is the instrument allowing, what it may ask for, is another story, and a large factory tour is what could help the must a yet experienced technician. (beginners and even seasoned techs are sometime not ready to catch fast enough the tonal differences obtained with different kind of hammer preps, and voicing instructions are often relatively basic.)

We all have a tendency to appreciate the "less work" hammer, but many of them are getting definitively too hard after a few years, if not enough work have been done when new.

Some voicing approaches are so much different than usual than I understand why some brands are having a preservation of their tone characteristics after so long..

The ideal concepts used in design and ameliorations of energy use are of course always highly interesting, but show their limits.

The indestructible soundboard tend to have a predictable tone, with less spectral modifications than the panels retaining some sort of compression. 

The optimum top of bridges are pushing the dynamics in the direction of the organ tone, hence a larger part allowed for the thin sustain, at detriment of the modulation level near the attack and the thick part of the tone is less heard by the audience (and less directly accessible to the pianist) 

I wonder for instance if the wave plane inversion (45°) is not allowed by the uncut soundboard, it is then providing (just an hypothesis) a different way to have a thunder like tone (full of defects , lets say so to please some) than a soundboard which helps much and is so efficient the tone is civilized very soon.

That makes a whole world and a whole range of instruments, and it is really amazing to hear that, year after year the listening is changing and the analysis get better.

One thing we can be aware of, is that the introduction of softer panels, and Japanese tone have became part of the standard in actual listening. I have a highly respected colleague that had the Yamaha tone in horror at first, and finished by appreciating it to the point he barely remind how was the Steinway tone 30 years ago. So that for the result of exposition to some tone...

Happy Esater to all volunteers piano technicians and rebuilders, (and musicians !) 

[Isaac OLEG]

Here is a recording I made on one piano I recently baught and prepped 

recorded with a Zoom H2, this is just improvisation, to have the piano sounding , as do the dealers, with abusing pedal ...!! . there is some "reverb" due to a vertical piano standing a few feet apart without its action.

I guess this can proove the interest of thickening the tone body, not only the attack. 

(this is one of the best pianos made in Germany some 30 years ago, if you can find the brand, but I doubt of that ;) 

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6GjQDkF_AMQVW5mbGFGOHBLTGs/edit?usp=sharing 

the piano is on sale , BTW

[Zirc...@aol.com]

Hi Ron,

 

Thanks for that reply.  Given that I am not set up for major soundboard work, I need to choose hammers which will enhance what is there and replace some rather heavy re-covers which were done in the very distant past.  I do have a set of dedicated Abels which I bought about 20 years ago with the intention of fitting them then.  However, having seen the revolution and choice in hammer making since then I realise I could probably do better now.  I was struck by your photo because it was obvious that these were not 'Bechstein' hammers but a hammer that you have discovered which I assumed works better.  Being in the UK we tend to buy from Germany rather than US and the Abel catalogue appears to be the most comprehensive available.  But how does one choose without having had the experience of going through many of the different sets. 

Are you around JD? 

 

Richard

[Isaac OLEG]

If it is a Bechstein, why not asking the factory? depending of the age of your instrument they will provide some ideas.

Factories are not "always" the best places when it comes to old pianos, but considering that only the devoted tech will obtain better results can be misleading.

There is something knew as "factory culture" that keep some tonal recipes. I would not dismiss that thinking I am more astute or think more smartly.

Some Bechstein factory techs have worked on old models, trying different methods to transform old linked actions or reduce string to keybed dimensions. 

You may need to exchange with the good person there, some of  them actually have mounted hammers in the 60 's and remind what the choices where. 

I only wish that more audio samples where provided, as we are ll capable of saying how happy our customers are.simple recorders are availeable, and gives enough quality to hear if a piano have a good tonal balance, enough "musical matiere" ...

Bechstein today use only Weickert "special" felt (Wurzen superior quality) a really excellent felt in my view. 

Special orders always better than the catalog parts, in my opinion. You sometime can be proposed hammers made for a factory as a good choice for the type of instrument you have.

[Zirc...@aol.com]

Hi Isaac,

I'm having two conversations on the site at present, the Petrof one with you, and I am suddenly side-tracked by curiosity by Ron Over's photos of some hammers he is fitting to a an old Bechstein.  Given that his Bechstein originally had a tied action it is obviously quite a bit older than mine of 1928.

You mention in your post about researching which hammers are used currently in a maker's factory.  Well, I tried this with the Petrof concert grand and I found out from their head technician that Abels were used on the new concert grands.  I then instructed Baumgartels (the Abel agent in Germany) to order me a set of the same hammers as supplied to Petrof.   The ones I received and have installed are ok but nothing special, and on the light side.  The drilling angle is very poor in places and does not replicate the original patterns I sent.  Basically I don't think the agent communicated properly with Abel.  I originally tried to contact Abel themselves but they put you straight in touch with an agent.  All very frustrating.  I suspect our friends in USA don't have this sort of hassle.

 

Richard

[Terry Farrell]

Does anyone have any suggestions on where I might find a bench that is an approximate match for an American square grand - it's a Steinway with a natural finish rosewood case. Owner knows she is not going to find a perfect match, but hoping for something that at least doesn't look out of place at the piano.

Thanks!

[Joseph Garrett]

Terry,
Traditionally, "benches" were not used. Adjustable stools were. However, I
used to get adjustable Benches from APSCO. They were hand crafted in Italy
and came close to the leg designs. I have one, (in the cobwebs<G>), in it's
original shipping box. It has a Gold, (sorta), diamond tuck upholstered
top. If you're interested I'll dig it out and take a pic of it
Joe


> [Original Message]
> From: Terry Farrell <mfar...@tampabay.rr.com>
> To: <pian...@googlegroups.com>
> Date: 4/1/2013 12:22:13 PM
> Subject: [ptech] Bench for Square Grand

[David Love]

Don’t get me started.  Too late.  Comments to both you and Isaac.

 

There is an extensive discussion that took place between Fred Sturm and me on the myptg website, btw, that touches on some of these issues with regard to hammers.  I think it was productive and worth reading if one cares to take the time. 

 

Yes, the class(es) at WPIII were meant to address these issues.   I hope to give them again in a slightly different and more condensed form (“Hammer Matching—understanding hammer attributes”  and what I refer to as “Structural Voicing”—two consecutive periods as the issues overlap.  I’m working on it now for 2014.  Hopefully I’ll have the opportunity. 

 

It’s not just hammer choice, it’s understanding hammer requirements and how various hammer attributes combine to impact  tone.  What the attributes of various hammers are, what accounts for this or that, power, partial development, attack character, shape of the tonal envelope, etc.  That, of course, has to be combined with the impedance characteristics of the piano and, yes, there is a personal taste issue that comes into play as well.  Harder to deal with that in this discussion, or any for that matter, but I think there are some general guidelines that trump personal taste.  Getting advice is fine as long as the person you are getting advice from is giving good advice or advice that you agree with. 

 

One problem is that most hammer classes are driven by those selling hammers.  “Voicing the ______________”. “The new and improved _____________”, “The best thing since sliced bread”.  Fill in whatever name you want.  They are really designed to promote a product.    They are not there to discuss hammer matching, and the distinct qualities of their hammers which is really the issue.  They don’t discuss whether that hammer may or not be appropriate for a given piano and why or why not.   They don’t discuss the various ways in which this hammer might be produced in order to achieve a different, read better, balance.  It’s often just another product to sell having already been manufactured and boxed, ready to ship, and many of them are pretty much the same as the previous iteration, or with only the slightest variation leaving the hammer essentially unchanged.  Some of them are not designed that well, IMHO.  All of them should come with the disclaimer “This hammer may or may not be appropriate for the piano you intend to put them on”.    It doesn’t really help the technician you are talking about.

 

Even amongst those presumably in the know there are disagreements about what the priorities and right combination and balance of attributes are.  I recently removed a relatively new set of hammers from a 1930’s original board, Steinway B in which the SW at note 88 was a whopping (and that’s what it sounded like) 7 grams!  Whose hammer it was is unimportant.  The original strike weight on that piano at 88 was something like 3.5.  What could have happened to that original board such that it needed a doubling of the strike weight there (or anywhere else for that matter)?  Rhetorical question, there is no good answer.   That was indicative of the set, btw.  The excessive mass in the treble required them to fill the hammer with lacquer, move the strike point inward to try and clean up the fifth octave, created an unwieldy touchweight and the person was about to sell the piano.  Literally.  This came from someone with a lot of experience.  The proper solution was a vast reduction in weight, some three grams approximately through the scale on each hammer. The same make hammer went back on there, btw, but it was not in any way the same hammer. 

 

So be careful what you ask for.

 

The best solution is for technicians to become acquainted with tone building requirements.  Del Fandrich has been teaching the idea of the tone building triangle: scale, soundboard, hammer.  It’s a very good way of thinking about things even if your ultimate decision about the precise balancing varies.

 

But the triangle doesn’t stop there.  Each of those components has its own triangle.  With scale perhaps it is the balancing of tension, inharmonicity, breaking strain.  With soundboards perhaps it is stiffness, mass, area.  Hammers have their own triangle of density, mass, profile (and tension).  All these things must be in balance in the hammer, changing appropriately in different parts of the scale and then they must work with the larger triangle of scale and soundboard. 

 

This is more important than who makes the hammer and to simply accept that so and so produces a hammer like this and such and such like this is first of all limiting.  Second, far too passive in terms of the demands that one should be making on hammer makers.  We should be telling them  what we want, not have them tell us what they will provide.  Third any quality hammer maker can make anything if they are competent, can use any of the available materials (felt is important).  Salespeople should not be telling us what we should use and we shouldn’t be listening to them, at least we should be cautious.    

 

We should let the hammer tell us if it’s performing well, be able to hear the structural elements of the hammer, and not settle for 50 – 100 stitches or saturating hammer with plastic in order for it to work.  It should be close out of the box, and it can be.  Anything we do to the hammer is destructive ultimately and so limited intrusion is better.  Be we can’t limit our intrusion if it comes out of the box a poor match for the piano we intend to put it on.  If it’s not a good match then either we’ve chosen poorly (certainly), or the hammer is not good quality. 

 

With respect to Isaac’s comments about factory guidance.  I say certainly not.  Factories who produce a certain product to sell are not the best necessarily to guide us.  The tonal characteristics of the piano derive from more than the hammer, though it is an important part.  I have not been satisfied with Bechstein’s recommendations for older pianos with original soundboards.  In fact, I had a horrifying experience with a customer who insisted on ordering them himself—a mistake on my part to even be involved.  It was a complete mismatch given the condition of the original board (pre 1900).   The same can be true of many such pianos.  Does the current NY Steinway hammer in any way resemble the hammer of 1920?   It does not and often a poor fit for that vintage instrument with the original board.  It is both heavier, bulkier and requiring lacquer, and a fair amount of it, and a different action ratio.  Yet they don’t sell a hammer that is in keeping with the original hammer.   

 

The hammer that Ron Overs put on the Bechstein he showed is no doubt  something very different from what Bechstein would have sold him.  His reporting of it being a cold-pressed hammer alone is enough to differentiate it.  Yet I presume that Ron put in a new soundboard and understood the requirements of that piano very well.  Well enough to design his own hammer for it. 

 

Each piano will vary even between the same make and model because soundboards can vary.  They age differently, they have different impedance characteristics, they may well have been engineered differently if you were to examine the rib scales, panel thickness, panel thinning and such.  Even without knowing that, however, your ears will tell you a lot, as much as you’ll need to know if you listen carefully and know what to listen for.  That’s what we should be teaching the newer technicians, not offering to sell them advice. 

 

Selecting hammers requires understanding the attributes on which hammers can vary, how those interact, what the requirements of a particular piano are as well as some good taste and judgment about piano tone generally.  I think we can risk having an opinion on that. 

 

How many iterations do we need?  A very good question and one which I am working on answering, at least for myself.  YMMV

 

 

 

David Love

www.davidlovepianos.com

 

From: pian...@googlegroups.com [mailto:pian...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Dale Erwin
Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 8:18 AM
To: pian...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [ptech] Tapering Hammerheads using Plane

 

This is all very true David. You & I have talked about this a great deal privately and your most recent class is one that has been long over due addressing this very subject.

  Hammer choice based on soundboard requirements, acoustic requirements and customer preference should be prioritized IMO in that order. That being said how would you advise a technician to proceed in hammer choice when he or she may have very little experience with the amazing and fantastic myriad of excellent hammer choices available today?  How can they avoid the pit fall of" I think I'll try that hammer" and see what happens? The point is, you and I, and many on  this list have a great deal of hammer selection experience to guide us in this and even so sometimes we're not entirely happy with the chocie we made. Right?

 SO my concern is  for the rookie or even not so rookie in that they may be struggling to make a right choice for their clients with a certain amount of anxiety and concern for the outcome of the job. 

  Being that's the case, it is  my opinion that it is a good idea to consult with people who can give guidance on this. I think many of us on list would be open to private consultation to those who would welcome a more sage and experienced recommendations. Know what I mean?  I think many of us are willing volunteers. I will.  Any othesr who want to humbly sign on here to be an advisor just post back and those who need assistance can call or write  privately.

This has been a very useful discussion all.

 Kindest regards

 

[Terry Farrell]

Hi Joe - yes, absolutely. If the legs are any sort of an approximation, I'm quite sure she would be interested. Anything would be better than spade leg or French provincial!

Terry Farrell

[Joseph Garrett]

The legs of my bench are, somewhat, French Provincial, but are of a close
color match to the Rosewood. To give you the history, this bench is the
first one that I ordered for my fully rebuilt Chickering Client. He wanted
a Red top and we got a Gold top. So, another bench was ordered. I purchased
the gold top one, for a "real deal" price, (I forget what that was
btw.<G>), rather than go through the hassle of shipping it back to APSCO.
I'll go dig that sucker out and take a pic. You can present it to your
client and we'll go from there. Or....I do have an authentic Victorian
Stool, rebuilt w/new wooden top, Faux Rosewood spindle finish, cast legs,
(not finished, just stripped to bare metal, (iron), awaiting a specific
order on the type of cloth/leather top wanted. (A clue: the APSCO bench
will be much cheaper.<G>)
Best,

Joe


> [Original Message]
> From: Terry Farrell <mfar...@tampabay.rr.com>
> To: <pian...@googlegroups.com>

> Date: 4/1/2013 1:09:19 PM
> Subject: Re: [ptech] Bench for Square Grand

[Joseph Garrett]

[Joseph Garrett]

[Zirc...@aol.com]

A very generous post David, full of comments and truths which resonate impressively and without question.

 

I also appreciated Dale Erwin's post earlier suggesting that all the re-builders who have now had considerable experience with matching hammers to particular makes and models could share their experience.  Whether this would be on a consultancy basis with payment or just private correspondence, it could have considerable mileage.  So many of us in the field who do not have major rebuilding resources and who major in tuning, repair and servicing really do need expert advice and guidance on this vexed area of hammer choice.   I have been looking forward for some time to the luxury of indulging myself with the two pianos I own and not needing to be looking at the clock or bank statement every five minutes.  Hopefully I will see some progress in this coming year.

 

Richard

[Ron Nossaman]

On 4/1/2013 4:47 PM, Joseph Garrett wrote:

And pictured...

Terry,
Grab it! That's definitely from another century, and planet, from the
looks of it. You'll never get closer.
Ron N

[Isaac OLEG]

Hi David, you are a born writer, are not you ?

Yes those are areas of the job where fundamental of basis are missing.

Not wanting to be arguing again (I know I have an awful strong tendency for that) , I believe that environment driven musical taste is providing a few traps, to me as well indeed.

I really miss audio samples to know how the proposed directions suit mine.

For the moment I mostly have find locally the tone management and choices that suit my musical taste and inclinations. 

What misses is the deep analysis of ratios you are used to conduct, but I am also often a little disturbed by that. Pianos being a system intended to accelerate a hammer, the main parameter after "static" balancing , is the acceleration level (curve) .

This is often tweaked simply by "feel" by the field technician , hence some shims placed here or there (after a few measures but also after real testing) spread progressivity is also noticed. 

But I agree that even in the factory not all technicians are producing the same job. jauges are used, but due to the placement mistakes and differnces between the original design and the final product, some actions have to be "tweaked" and that is done with more or less success

It is evidence  that the keyboard ratio is dictating our choices in hammer mass and allows more or less modifications. 

Some hammers are simply not availeable  , the thin moldings of the precedent Renner generations are not produced, nr the models with more felt in the treble (only for Steinways) 

The hammers Ron have used looks as the samples I received from Bechstein some time ago, but that where felted with the VFG "natural felt" .in the end Bechstein uses actually Renner for most larger models, but as most piano factories they seem to be in a permanent quest for better hammers, pushing the hammer makers to send them samples with new felt  when it is available (the original Weickert was not dense enough on the first tests, they get it more resilient and are very happy with them now.

I guess (not sure) the models they propose for older models are made by Abel , with the original non symmetrical shape (but unfortunately they are yet too heavy and need to be thinned a lot) 

If you would be kind enough to propose us a few audio samples of finished work, that should be en lighting to me. As I told yet, I like the American tone talking there of the tone of pianos may be before WWII . But I have my particular point on what is "singing treble" and I am often under the impression that the voicing there is "defensive", not constructive. 

To be honest, I have been much deceived with so called optimizations , this is a so complicated subject, taking in account so much parameters up to the last final unison, that I stopped jumping in hops as I could have done some time before. I believe we can discover many things by ourselves but, being a pianist, you know well that masters frequentation is necessary to understand some pôints (sometime things we catch without understanding their content) 

I would agree that anyway the soundboard and belly can "only" provide a certain level and a certain type of tone, so it can be a huge mistake to use one method only, or one "brand" of hammers , believing it will give the instrument the tone of the piano they where designed for. 

Soft pressed hammers have some nice parameters in their tonal output, but I believe they need to be played much to obtain a little dynamics in the treble. The felt quality only can only get us somewhere and not farther. ouer modification of masses distribution within the hammer with the needle, allow to get some resiliency because it was installed by the pressing. When we begin to tear the hammer of course it is too far. I have senn numerous Renner set that had 3 stiches as prevoicing, and they where mostly good for small pianos. on pianos with dynamic abilities they harden and give an aggressive tone after a few years. why, because the springiness was not build from low enough. On the other hand a really well prepped hammer (meaning sometime half a day work just for pre needling) will be extremely stable in time, and only the tone will get clearer and more precise after a few years.

The way we build the springiness and what zone of dynamics is strenghtened, modify at the same time the hammer shape getting out the "juice" of a given piano is basically a hammer mass question, then immediately after a choice in regard of underfelt, impregnation, thickness of the felt,. 

Hammer makers can do some variations but are reluctant to do so, they have a given process using strips of felt of a given size that correspond exactly with the underfelt and the moulding.

SO if you ask for something else, either you are a factory and your order have some interest to the maker, or he have to use something he produce yet for some factory, and which is going in the direction.

About thin moldings, the risk to break (the fiber, or the wood) is too large for hammer makers to accept to do so today.

Using the old presses and little heat they can provide them, but now you have not the resilient impact at FFF but some damping. WHen using hardeners, the tone is better but always straighten, keeping the hardening imprint at all volumes. SO I believe that hammers that can provide a lively impact only can drive the piano a little off road, which is what we expect at some moment when playing. Not to say hardeners where not widely used on pressed hammers, but they are for one tone quality.

I could go on for hours..

ALl the best

. 

[David Love]

You make a lot of points and it’s hard to address them all.  Each one is a topic unto itself. 

 

But…

 

We are limited in our action ratios to a fairly small range (5.5 – 6).  While it can make some tonal difference, I don’t think it’s enough to really use that as criteria for tone creation.  Also, since F = MA as you increase the acceleration by having a higher action ratio you will likely have to lower the mass of the hammer.  While it’s not a direct trade off it’s a bit of a wash.  I prefer to choose the hammer for tone and include the weight as one important factor in tone production.  It might need to be lighter and it might need to be heavier.  In the treble the weight range is quite small, I find, though the density requirements can change.  In the bass the needs can vary more.  I then adjust the action ratio as needed to balance the hammer that is required.  I don’t tend to work in a very big range (as you can see from my chart that I posted).  There are exceptions but that range covers most everything that I will encounter in everyday life.  Rarely on an old soundboard do I see the need to increase the mass of the hammer, generally the requirement is in the other direction.  Lower impedance needs less energy.  Poorer upper partial development needs lighter weight.  On old soundboards the impedance moves lower, never higher.  So I don’t usually see the need to lower the action ratio in those cases unless something was amiss to begin with, which does happen, fairly often, in fact.    If I replace the soundboard then that can change things, of course. 

 

Cold pressed is different than “soft” pressed.  But you can cold press dense felt and also you can increase the effective density by stretching the felt more.  But very dense felt that is relatively thick will be hard to stretch thus it will be hard to get as much tension.  Some amount of prepressing will be necessary and that will also reduce tension somewhat.  So all of this has to be balanced out and the hammer maker knows better than anyone what the limits are.  Density achieved by stretching is better than density achieved by brute force pressing (or hardening), at least I think so.  The more highly tensioned hammer will have more “liveliness”, more bounce, more stability, nicer sound.   Hard to give an exact scientific explanation for that except that it may well be explained by how effectively the hammer functions as a spring, how its compressing matches its uncompressing and the degree to which it undergoes material deformation.  In short, the elastic quality of tensioned felt may allow it to resist being packed down more quickly, among other things.  But this is something for scientists to research.  I can only speculate.   

 

By proper profiling of the hammer (controlling the thickness of the felt over the molding) a softer felt can produce more than adequate power.  Most “soft” hammers have too much bulk and so they remain soft unless hardened.  Profile is one of the attributes of the hammer that requires balancing with other attributes.  For example, you don’t want a high profile (thick felt)  soft hammer and you don’t want a low profile very dense hammer.  This is, of course, all relative to the area of the scale we are talking about. 

 

The issue of taste is an important one and it’s difficult to define or address.  But  I think we need to be careful here.  The paradigm of listening for piano technicians is somewhat different than for pianists.  For one thing, the natural area of focus for technicians tends to be after the attack.  They learn to ignore the attack almost unconsciously because that’s where you tune primarily.  Pianists focus much more on the attack sound, the thump, from which they perceive and control power and dynamic range.  Very skilled technician’s go back and forth easily, focusing their hearing in a different part of the tonal envelope.  Less skilled ones don’t or can’t get away from their own bias. 

 

The interesting thing is that most pianists never complain about a piano having inadequate sustain, but technicians do all the time.  Pianists control sustain with the pedal and instinctively back off on the attack in order to create an illusion of better sustain.  Technicians want it to be there when they pluck.  Pianists don’t pluck.  Pianists basically experience the piano in a different way than technicians.  Technician’s frequently walk up to the piano and start banging on C5 or C6 to see how it sustains and if it has power there.  Pianists just walk up and start playing. They tend to experience the piano more holistically.  It’s different but it can have an effect on taste.  Like Rashomon.   

 

I’ll try and post a recording at some point if I can.  Have to make one first on a piano that exemplifies what I am talking about.  I can’t say I’ve achieved my goal on every piano that I’ve done.  It’s a constant process of search and refine.  Never ending really.  I both hate that and love it.  Overall what I’m after is pretty simple and not that hard to express.  I want the broadest dynamic range—ppp to fff.  Color as well, though I think that’s more a matter of meticulous preparation and refined voicing (and scale dynamics).  I want to be able to push the piano to the edge of distortion and don’t mind if I can push it past ever so slightly.  At least I know I can get there.  I want the piano to get louder when I play with more force and I want more partial development along with that.  I don’t want the fortissimo to flatten out too soon and I also don’t want the upper partial development to flatten out either (unless I choose by voicing, in the bass for example).  I want those both to develop in a graduated way and together.  I want an accessible pianissimo.  I want some thump on the attack but not such that it dominates the tonal envelope too much.  I want a balance between attack and sustain but I take what sustain the belly has to offer in that respect and go from there.  The slope of the sustain curve directs the level where I place the attack phase.    

 

Ok, I’ve stuck my neck out but what the hell, not the first time.

 

I could elaborate more but it will start to sound too cosmic.    

 

This has all been good but I should probably take a break (I’m sure some of the natives will be please to hear that) and resolve my taxes (it’s that time, argh).  Enjoyable discussion though.    

 

David Love

www.davidlovepianos.com

 

From: pian...@googlegroups.com [mailto:pian...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Isaac OLEG
Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 3:45 PM
To: pian...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [ptech] Tapering Hammerheads using Plane

 

Yes those are areas of the job where fundamental of basis are missing.

 

Not wanting to be arguing again (I know I have an awful strong tendency for that) , I believe that environment driven musical taste is providing a few traps, to me as well indeed.

 

I really miss audio samples to know how the proposed directions suit mine.

 

….snip

 

[Douglas Gregg]

David,
I would not mind if you go on some more. It is very eloquent and
informative. It is hard to put into words but you do it well. I am
with you entirely.

Doug Gregg

[Isaac OLEG]

Hi David, now you are more specific and it gets more interesting, thank you. I agree with the way you state things, 

When you say 5.5 to 6 it sound like the ratio we can find when measuring real lever arms (while it goes really higher with smaller knuckles or 16 mm distance)

Saying that old panel mean less heavy hammers is also true, I have been deceived by the search for the modern ratio, tone wise, at some occasion. Then some rare exceptions happens as you know, there are pianos that accept a lot of dynamics without saturation (Bluethner comes to mind) 

Also the more or less clean tone (depending of evenness of string length in unison , variations in strike at the surface of the hammer, shape of the hammer also) seem to be connected to the amount of dynamics allowed.as it add "artificially " brightness, allowing for more power without the tone getting more clear , simply a balance of tone question probably. 

I still believe we need to reinforce the tone from the 5 th octave up anyway. That is the zone where I find the most dissipation of thickness in the sound samples I find with cold pressed hammers. WIth pressed one we reinforce the water "drop", yes at the expense of global outer tension I agree (so probably softer levels of playing are less silky)

I always wondered if using a little harder wire, as Mapes (if I am not dreaming) and softer felts (but correctly tense) is not what allows that American tone, that looks a little like some older Bechstein tone , catchy at low level, more difficult to drive at higher levels. Those are probably more difficult to record and reproduce correctly as that very smooth sensation is also perceived under the fingers.

You are right that pianists are the kings of adaptability, but not that they dont appreciate tone thickness/sustain, it cannot be replaced with pedaling, and it is where the color palette can be manipulated, in my opinion. 

The recording I posted above is a very small vertical piano 113 cm tall with largely enough thickness (and hammer impregnation) . those tones that drops soon and dissipate are not very comfortable to the pianist, how will he make the melody sing clean  if he is obliged to pedal at every note ? 

But indeed only the belly will allow that , if not enough , looking for the best strike point,( and hammer orientation vs strings plane)  reinforcing, tuning, can help to raise the activity, as well as a faster hammer stroke very certainly. 

I am impressed by your knowledge of the ratio changes this is very en lighting . I hope you can make some recordings with a little explanations. Thank you

I. OLeg

[Terry Farrell]

Thanks for the pics Joe. I'll forward them to her and get back with you. Thanks big time!

Terry Farrell

> <Italian Adjustable Bench (Victorian Style) 002.jpg>

[Terry Farrell]

No doubt about it!

Terry Farrell

[David Love]

The need to reinforce from the fifth octave up will depend on a combination of hammer attributes as I've discussed and isn't a forgone conclusions with cold pressed hammers. I don't think the wire has anything to do with it.

I'm not trying to suggest that pianists don't care about sustain. Moderation in interpretation please. I just think they don't obsess about it quite like we do.

David Love
www.davidlovepianos.com

[Isaac OLEG]

Well I have to experiment that myself, but I have cold pressing with refelted hammers yet. Good for old instruments sometime.

Btw I agree small angle planes are neat, dont know why I did not have success with...

Greetings

[Terry Farrell]

Hi Joe,

She is interested in the bench, but would like to know the asking price - what are you asking for it? Thanks!

Terry

> <Italian Adjustable Bench (Victorian Style) 001.jpg>

[Terry Farrell]

Sorry Joe - meant to send that private.  :-(

Terry Farrell

[Joseph Garrett]

Terry,
I would say $900.00 Plus Shipping.
Best,

Joe


> [Original Message]
> From: Terry Farrell <mfar...@tampabay.rr.com>
> To: <pian...@googlegroups.com>

> Date: 4/10/2013 2:58:39 PM

[Isaac OLEG]

[Terry Farrell]

Hello, hello, hello, hello, hello.....

[Isaac OLEG]

My bench is not exactly historical, but I could not come up with something better in the tapering plane thread. 

[Joseph Garrett]

I'd have to say, not even close. That furniture style was not used in square grand design. It was too weak.

Joe

 

Joe Garrett, R.P.T.

Captain of the Tool Police

Squares R I

http://gpianoworks.com/

 

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Isaac OLEG

To: pian...@googlegroups.com

Sent: 4/12/2013 4:39:22 AM

Subject: Re: [ptech] Bench for Square Grand

[Euphonious Thumpe]

Well, like I said,. I could buiy 3 real sqaure grand stools a day around here for less than $100 each....but who ever listens to me? Thumpe

---

From: Joseph Garrett <joega...@earthlink.net>;
To: <pian...@googlegroups.com>;

Subject: Re: [ptech] Bench for Square Grand

Sent: Fri, Apr 12, 2013 4:29:42 PM

[Joseph Garrett]

In what condition?

Best,

Le vendredi 12 avril 2013 01:16:03 UTC+2, Terry Farrell a �crit :

Hello, hello, hello, hello, hello.....

On Apr 11, 2013, at 4:18 PM, Isaac OLEG wrote:

Le jeudi 11 avril 2013 01:05:59 UTC+2, Joseph Garrett a �crit :

[Euphonious Thumpe]

Anywhere from really rough and unrestored, to rather nice and unrestored. (Or restored for $150) Thumpe

---

From: Joseph Garrett <joega...@earthlink.net>;
To: <pian...@googlegroups.com>;
Subject: Re: [ptech] Bench for Square Grand

Sent: Fri, Apr 12, 2013 7:23:21 PM

Le jeudi 11 avril 2013 01:05:59 UTC+2, Joseph Garrett a écrit :

[Isaac OLEG]

what does it looks like ? can you plane hammers with thm ?

[paul bruesch]

isaac. they are duscissing a bench to sit on at a aquare grande 4 playing. Not a bench to panel ur hammars onn.

[Isaac OLEG]

Thank you Paul, yes I understood it. Have no idea of the look. (and we are in a thread about planing hammers)

[Isaac OLEG]

the tool to check pitch angle , this is mor ein the thread !

L

[paul bruesch]

This has NOTHING to do with a bench for a square grand. Nada. Rien.

[Isaac OLEG]

Then that are the pleasure of Google groups, but I am answering in "plane a hammer thread" , but after an irruption of a conversation about the bench in the middle of the thread" .
The original thread was somehow exhausted anyway.

Sorry if it fall in the wrong thread for you.

Isaac

[Isaac OLEG]

[Isaac OLEG]

Small angle plane works well. I was doing so with a chisel or a knive  beforethen