Juice and the Steinway hammers

[Horace Greeley]

Hi, Ed!

At 07:02 PM 1/10/2001 -0500, you wrote:

>Greetings,

And, Felicitations!

>     I think we could profitably discuss this dilution thing.   I have used
>various strengths with various results, but would hope that a communal-cyber
>reach for consensus could give us all a broader perspective. (OK, that is a
>verbose way of saying, "let's talk about the solution", but blame it on a
>long day and a little Scotch).

Black Label?  I'll be right over.  That is, after all, the prerequisite for 
all substantive discussions of voicing...

>Here I go:
>    Seems to me that the thicker strengths don't go as deep into the felt.  A
>very thin solution carrys farther, but has less effect. So,  who has any sort
>of rational experience with the difference between a lot of thin stuff and a
>lesser amount of thick?

Me.  Once again, we are in agreement.

>    On new Steinway hammers, which I have used in the recent past, I have 
> been
>found my best results from first dosing them with a 8:1 solution of lacquer
>from the 9:00 and 3:00 o'clock positions, putting enough on them so that the
>wetting appears to just reach the sides of the core.  This stuff also
>migrates upward, but leaves the space between strike point and core tip
>alone.  After a day, at least, to allow this to dry, I listen, and usually
>find that there isn't much change in the tone below mezzo-fart,(slightly
>non-technical description, but there's that scotch again).   Sometimes, I
>hear a fair amount of change, if so I leave them alone, but not often.
>    Following this, I lock the outer shoulders up with a generous dose of 
> 4:1.
>  This doesn't seem to penetrate as much, possibly due the the thinner stuff
>already having gotten in first.  However,  the addition of this shoulder
>stiffening usually makes the hammer more responsive at playing levels above
>the mf,(see above).
>    If done evenly, this initial treatement allows the piano to be played
>comfortably, albeit the liberal use of words like, mellow, full, green,
>developing, etc. when speaking of the tone will placate the pianist enough to
>allow them to accept the "darkness" of a new set of hammers.  If all goes
>right, and there is sufficent play, these hammers often begin to develop a
>malleable tone, which is my target.  Play it softly and the sound is like the
>wingbeats of the swans lifting off the lake out by the gazebo in the setting
>sun.  Lay into it, and the angel's trumpets begin sounding from out in the
>ether, not harsh, but indicative of brighter days to come.

I've left this intact largely because, while I might say it differently, I 
do not think that I can say it any better.  I will often begin with 6:1, 
but that is because of having done it enough, I feel confident about the 
result.  However, the same confidence also instructs me to take each 
instrument individually as I find it, so, many times 8:1 is the right place 
to start.

>    I like the sound of such hammers after a few hundred hours of play.  They
>respond to touch with a palette of tonal color, and when coupled with an
>appropriate temperament, deliver to an artist an instrument of depth and
>clarity, power and sensitivity.

Yes, and, they (the hammers) will produce an overall more pleasing product 
if allowed to grow into this state.  By that time, there will have been 
some additional shaping/modification done, and things will probably be 
about as right as they can be.

>   Sometimes the owner wants it right now, at which time I use pure 
> acetone on
>the top of the hammer's crown.  This has the effect of slightly hardening the
>felt by drawing some of the lacquer towards the center of the core, (I
>think).   If this is still not enough,  I add maybe two drops of the 4:1
>directly on the strike point, giving the hammer a little sizzle at all
>levels.  Some pianists like this, for it does have an edge at pianissimo that
>they use for clarity.

It was in the first part of the above context that the keytop/acetone 
solutions first started being used at S&S.  The acetone alone, as Ed 
suggests, will certainly make a difference.  For some folks, the immediacy 
(think about the sales-floor mentality here) of the change is what is 
determinate.

The drops of 4:1 on the strike point are an old Joe/Ralph Bisceglie 
trick.  If someone wants that specific sound, this is the way to get it.

>    It is also effective on some hammers which really feel soft to the
>thumbnail all over, to place a drop or two of 4:1 mix on the sides of the
>hammer right at the tip of the core wood. This seems to turn the trumpets up
>on the FF level of playing, but doesn't interfere with the tonal palette of
>the softer playing.

This is a very effective method, and one which can preserve the life of the 
hammer (if the folks are willing to put up with the hundred-or-so hours of 
playing mentioned above).  It also means less work getting the shift 
voicing to work properly.

>    Ah, the juice might be speaking now.  I would like to know what others 
> are
>doing with the solutions. ???

Having been at the office 14 hours yesterday and pushing 12 today, the 
solution most on my mind at the moment is the one mentioned previously by 
Mr. Foote.  Does anyone know if CAUT is digested?

David, in answer to your question, just about any applicator with which you 
are comfortable is the "right" one.  When I was doing new piano prep all 
the time, I used a Clairol hair coloring bottle (the graduations on the 
side made for easy mixing of different strengths of whatever was 
needed).  Now, mostly I use the needle-tipped oil bottles available from 
most of the supply houses.  These allow much greater control over what is 
going where.  A glue bottle sounds just fine to me.

Best!  (Now, where is that Scotch bottle?)

Horace





>Regards,
>Ed Foote
>