jon writes: <<The older hammers filed with ease, was that due to shellac in the hammer or lacquer or a better hammer making process. I bet the later.>> I generally autopsy hammers before I throw them away, and have cut open a lot of older Steinway hammers. I don't see evidence of hardener in there before the 1950's. I know, they say that the hammers have always had a hardener put in them, but I don't believe that. A 1930 bass hammer, when cut open and the felt worked back and forth until it frays, doesn't seem to have anything in there at all, and soaking the pieces with alcohol doesn't seem to change anything, which it would do if there was shellac imbedded in the felt. I think the new hammers are made from felt that is cut poorly, allowing the felting layers to be so non-continuous that when taken out of the cauls, any attempt to shape them will, like as not, follow a "grain" line directly into the hammer instead of following the contour around the edges. I remember the Yamaha hammers of the the late '70's vintage doing much the same thing, even though they were harder to begin with. Anybody else got ideas? I don't mind adding lacquer to the new Steinway hammers before I do anything else, I haven't seen a new set in years that didn't ultimately need more than I thought possible. Our new ones at Vanderbilt have the professors gnashing teeth,(after all this IS Gnashville!), and bewailing the deadness of their new pianos. I have been holding back adding any more lacqer, hoping that a semester or two will bring the hammers up, but I had to harden one set on the direct request of a teacher. I hardened the shoulders with two eyedropper fulls of the 4:1 and it made a little difference. She was thrilled. I hope that it will just speed up the break-in and not leave us with a real twanger next year. Regards, Ed Foote
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC