[CAUT] S&S Hammers and lacquer / an old S #287725

[Greg Newell]

Very well written David! Thanks!!


At 09:46 AM 9/21/2007, you wrote:
>Perhaps I didn't word that very carefully.  Of course a change in hammer
>will change the tone.  My point was that you won't be able to completely
>mask the underlying tonal structure of the piano by simply changing the
>hammer.  In other words, you won't convert a Yamaha to a Steinway by simply
>putting a Steinway hammer on it.  If you could, we could all have that
>Steinway sound for a lot less money.  The piano will still maintain many
>characteristics of the Yamaha sound though through a slightly different
>filter.
>
>With respect to soundboard response, there are some good examples of
>soundboards that have survived well with good sustain and the like.
>Unfortunately, there are also many that have not.
>
>To comment further on the difference in tone between a lacquered and
>non-lacquered hammer, I think one of the main differences is the layered
>structure of the hammer necessitated by the presence of lacquer.  With the
>lacquered hammer you are forced to create a thin layer of needled felt over
>the surface of the hammer in order to mitigate the tendency for the hammers
>to ping excessively when the lacquer is present on the surface.  The
>crystalline substance laying just below the surface is thus engaged only
>when the hammer is compressed enough to get through the fluffy top layer.
>This does create a sense of changing colors as the hammer is played at
>different levels.  You can get a sense, especially in the treble, a sort of
>crystalline sound beneath a soft veneer.  It's definitely a high maintenance
>type of hammer since that top layer must be maintained carefully.
>Unfortunately, the constant dressing of that top layer also shortens the
>effect life of the felt at that level and it must be periodically removed
>and the process started all over again until you get down to where the
>lacquer is simply too dense to really deal with effectively.  In addition,
>over time, the lacquer continues to harden and the flexibility of the hammer
>on a deeper level is compromised and the tone at a forte level tends to get
>too harsh.   The non lacquered hammer need not be put through the same
>procedure because there is no lacquer noise factor to avoid.  The tops of
>these hammers can be polished with very fine paper in order to get that
>shine in the tone that lacquer provides without fear of an unwanted zing
>resulting from an unaddressed lacquer crystal.  Those hammers tend to have a
>more stable voicing and, treated well, a longer effective life.
>
>At least that's my take on it.
>
>David Love
>davidlovepianos at comcast.net
>www.davidlovepianos.com
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of
>Richard Brekne
>Sent: Friday, September 21, 2007 12:47 AM
>To: caut at ptg.org
>Subject: [CAUT] S&S Hammers and lacquer / an old S #287725
>
>On this general subject I'd like to report I just got finished with an
>old S.... actually one of the nicest sounding S instruments I have ever
>heard.  Absolutely delightful treble... and really I suppose I could say
>that from around F2 upwards... The lowest bass is a bit tubby... or
>however one chooses to describe that low bass sound Steinway gets.
>
>The new hammers were evened so as to conform to a Stanwood top medium
>curve, and were German Renners Wurzen I felt.  They needled nicely and
>ended up with about 50-60 three needle 6-7 mm deep first needling jabs
>in the bass..  down to around 25 in the highest treble.
>
>Sustain time was quite astounding for this old Steinway...  Tunelab
>registered between 2.1 and 3.4 seconds on C8 !! (6 samples)  F7 3.1 to
>4.9 !  C7 had a high of 5.5,  F6 8.1, and C6 a whopping 11 seconds.
>Given the many discussions about the Steinway soundboard design... I
>really find myself lacking for a way of finding compatibility between
>this result... and the idea that these boards will by definition loose
>their ability to function well.   I might add that the sound was
>anything but thin and weak... it was full, round and very powerful.  I'd
>put it up against many very new pianos of larger size...
>
>A recording of this instrument will be forth coming.
>
>In anycase... back to the lacquer / non-lacquer bit.... I still have the
>old hammers and will see if there is anyone at the UiB who can
>assertain  whether lacquer had been used at any time.  Given its a
>Hamburg instrument... that may be doubtfull... and even if there is, the
>lacquer could have come from anywhere.   I also know of a early 30's B
>laying around town.... all original and laying hidden in a garage for
>about 60 years...
>
>Cheers
>RicB

Greg Newell
Greg's Piano Forté
www.gregspianoforte.com
216-226-3791 (office)
216-470-8634 (mobile)

2003,04,05 & 06 winners of
Angie's List Super Service Award