[CAUT] The "new" S&S Hammers.

[Douglas Wood]

Fred, got any pictures? I use a multiple-needle tool, but part of  
what it does is to limit depth so shift voicing is fast.

Doug


On Sep 15, 2007, at 9:29 AM, Fred Sturm wrote:

>     I'll agree with Eric essentially about the current Steinway  
> hammers. My
> last couple sets - pre-lacquered in the factory - were about where  
> they
> would be after my first lacquering, and needed more in the top couple
> octaves. So it was basically a time/step saver for me. The evenness  
> and
> shape are far better than even two years ago. (One set I bought  
> prehung, and
> I'm not sure I'll do that again - needed too much travel and  
> burning. They
> were pre-traveled, and half my traveling was removing their paper,  
> meaning
> it was twice as much work as doing it myself). But for those who hate
> lacquer, obviously you don't want these hammers. Hey, they're  
> lacquered!
> They're intended to be lacquered!
>     I have found that bringing down lacquered hammers that are too
> harsh/bright for the customer can often be done quickly and in a very
> controlled way by using small diameter needles in a fixture. The  
> Steinway
> guys are using, for una corda, a hammershank with a sawn slot,  
> jammed with 5
> - 6 #6 needles (pressed against one another with no gap), held in  
> by glue. I
> find this a rather crude tool, and have made my own, far more subtle
> adaptations of the idea. I use a piece of that Renner spacing  
> material (1/8"
> x 1/2" or so hornbeam material used between rows of shanks in the  
> packing
> box), and drill holes in the end with a #70 or so bit. It's touchy  
> work to
> set up precisely spaced and centerpunched dimples, but then the  
> drill press
> (with a pin punch adapter) does a great job. I have several with  
> different
> spacings and needle sizes, and find I use #10 and #12 needles the  
> most, with
> #8 and #7 for occasional use, usually una corda only. Gaps between  
> each
> needle range from a little less than 1 mm to 2 mm or so, and the  
> needles
> stick out only about 2 - 3 mm.
>     I use these voicing tools in the string groove, straight down  
> to the
> hilt into the crown (or not so deep If I choose), and once on  
> either side of
> the crown. The #12's do a very subtle job of taking away zing, and  
> can be
> used two, three, or more times as needed. Then thicker needles in  
> the una
> corda full and between positions.
>     Touch up with these tools is fast, and lasts pretty well. I  
> guess I have
> "moderate heavy use," not like what Eric describes <G>, but I find  
> that a
> voicing touchup will last a few months before it is getting raucous  
> again. I
> find these thin needles especially effective in the high treble,  
> where fat
> needles just make woodpecker holes and are quite ineffective and
> uncontrollable in changing tone color. I use these same techniques  
> with
> hard-pressed hammers as well.
>     I guess I should add that these needle sizes are available in  
> large
> fabric stores, for embroidery or other special use. While you're  
> there, you
> can find nice circular wheel cutters of various diameters (Olfa and  
> other
> brands) and large cutting pads, an array of fine scissors, eyelet  
> tools and
> supplies, and lots of other handy stuff - yet another tool store to  
> spend
> money in <G>.
>     About hammer longevity, I have a theory that needling style has  
> a big
> effect. I think there is a big difference between sudden jabbing and
> relatively slow pressing of the needles into the felt. Jabbing  
> tears far
> more fibers than pressing. So jabbing will lead to more rapid wear.  
> And with
> Steinway, it's more a matter of diameter of needle. The narrower  
> ones do a
> lot less fiber tearing.
> Regards,
> Fred Sturm
> University of New Mexico
>
> On 9/13/07 2:19 PM, "Wolfley, Eric (wolfleel)"  
> <WOLFLEEL at ucmail.uc.edu>
> wrote:
>
>> Dennis,
>>
>> I've had nothing but good experience with these hammers and I've  
>> found
>> that the quality control (i.e. shape and uniformity) is much  
>> better now
>> than it was even a couple of years ago. After experimenting with many
>> other hammers over the years, I won't put any other hammers on a NY
>> Steinway. In the past I would find myself soaking Steinway hammers  
>> 2-3
>> times in a 3:1 lacquer thinner to lacquer solution (2:1 for large
>> grands) before I felt there was a good foundation to the tone.  
>> With the
>> pre-lacquered hammers I'll still find myself soaking the set at least
>> once. Obviously this will make the surface quite bright. It is  
>> easy and
>> quick to get this harshness to go away with shallow needling at the
>> strikepoint which leaves the firmness underneath producing a big, fat
>> tone. This is the method that the Steinway concert techs use and  
>> it is
>> quite effective. I use this method whether the piano is going into a
>> practice room, living room or onstage though the smaller, lighter
>> hammers tend to need less lacquer. There must be a differentiation  
>> made
>> between the term "power" and "brightness". Some people (notably
>> pianists) seem to use those words interchangeably. The current NY
>> hammers sound fairly "bright" right out of the box but it is mainly
>> surface brightness. This brightness can be manipulated by surface
>> needling but if the hammer doesn't have a good foundation the tone  
>> may
>> then sound dead. If the hammer seems to "die" when you shallow-needle
>> the strikepoint, it probably needs more lacquer underneath.
>>
>> The hammers are lacquered at the factory by being dipped together  
>> as a
>> set in what I was told is 3:1 lacquer for 30 seconds. This ensures a
>> certain amount of uniformity. It is hard to imagine that you have  
>> gotten
>> a set that is overlacquered unless somebody lost track and dipped  
>> your
>> set twice. Of course, stranger things have happened. BTW, I always
>> listen to the hammers in the piano before doing any lacquering.
>>
>> Also BTW, Steinway will be offering a voicing class as part of the  
>> CAUT
>> program next June at the PTG convention in Anaheim. All, as  
>> always, are
>> welcome, of course.
>>
>> Eric
>>
>> Eric Wolfley, RPT
>> Head Piano Technician
>> Cincinnati College-Conservatory of Music
>> University of Cincinnati
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of
>> johnsond
>> Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 11:31 AM
>> To: College and University Technicians
>> Subject: [CAUT] The "new" S&S Hammers.
>>
>>
>> Anyone care to share your experiences with the new S&S Hammers  
>> from this
>>
>> summer?  They come with a note to us Technicians......
>> ________
>> "Due to a process improvement in the manufacturing......  you may  
>> notice
>>
>> a slightly harder hammer.  With this in mind we would suggest that  
>> you
>> do not juice these hammers before testing in the piano.  Juicing  
>> these
>> hammers before installation and pre-testing may result in a brighter
>> than anticipated tone. "
>> ________
>>
>> OK-   Actually the hammers looked good and shaped up just fine.  I  
>> did
>> not put one drop of lacquer or any other hardener on  these hammers
>> except for  4 notes in the high treble.  The piano has been back in
>> service now for a couple months.  They are bright indeed!!  Just this
>> morning the faculty pianist actually told me that now he "hates" this
>> piano.  I am trying keep him patient and working with them, but  
>> there is
>>
>> only so much needling I can do.  I can't take the piano out of  
>> service
>> to wash them with thinner until maybe Christmas break.  The worst  
>> part
>> is that it starts to make me look bad when the player is beginning to
>> wish he had the old worn hammers back......  @#$!    I'm sorry,  
>> but we
>> are not paid enough to take that kind of responsibility for  
>> materials.
>>
>>
>> So....   Anyone else have a better experience?  Maybe it's just this
>> set-
>>
>> thanks,
>>
>> Dennis Johnson
>> St. Olaf College
>>
>>
>