---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment Aside from the sound, there is another aspect to a hammer change on a=20 Yamaha : the weight. I have done countless hammer changes on Yamaha grands and only one time=20= had a bummer with Yamaha hammer heads which had been glued too far out=20= on the shanks, clearly a factory mistake. Otherwise, all hammer sets I used, were beautifully glued, needed=20 relatively little work and always sounded right. Furthermore, the price of a Yamaha complete hammer assembly is still=20 very reasonable compared to what Steinway or B=F6sendorfer asks for=20 almost the same material and work. I have followed the discussion about=20= price but to me it always seems better to change hammers and shanks at=20= the same time, because the centers are brand new and the hammer rolls=20 too, resulting in a reliable regulation and touch. And, as I said, the weight is very important too, so when we buy Yamaha=20= hammers for a Yamaha, it is always ok. So. when a hammer change is needed for a Yamaha, why not go with the=20 good old trusted flow? 1. the price is reasonable (according to me) 2. the weight is always healthy and no leading or, whatever, is needed=20= afterwards 3. installing and regulating the new Yamaha set can easily be done=20 within a day including a tuning and first voicing and does not require=20= days of extra work like with a Steinway 4. the final result is : a better Yamaha then before, a happy customer,=20= a happy tech with a very interesting and challenging job which pays=20 well too. So why bother with 'strange' hammers that have to be glued and after=20 all take much more time than the ready made perfect set. Just a question, in response to what I read about this subject. antares the Netherlands www.concertpianoservice.nl On zondag, sep 7, 2003, at 00:59 Europe/Amsterdam, Erwinspiano@aol.com=20= wrote: > In a message dated 9/5/2003 4:21:46 PM Pacific Daylight Time,=20 > A440A@aol.com writes: > > Subj: now what?, (hammer choices) > Date: 9/5/2003 4:21:46 PM Pacific Daylight Time > From: A440A@aol.com > Reply-to: pianotech@ptg.org > To: pianotech@ptg.org > Sent from the Internet > > > > Greetings, > So, my C-3 customer that is getting new hammers sez he certainly=20 > doesn't > want them to sound like new STeinway hammers, which to him are too=20 > soft and > round sounding,=A0 and he doesn't want the glassy sound that comes = from=20 > the studio > C-7's with use and lacquer all over them them.=A0=A0 His knuckles and=20= > shank pinning > are too good to throw away, so the stock Yamaha hammers are not the=20 > ticket.=A0=A0 > =A0 I am trying to make a decision between Piano-tek's = Imadagawa,(which=20 > I have > used quite a bit of in the past), and their Abel "Standard" series.=A0 = He > records this piano in his business, and he wants it to be brilliant=20 > without being > harsh from the get-go.=A0 I know I can needle the Imadagawa's=A0 to=20 > virtually > anywhere I need them, but am intrigued by the Abel.=A0 The only sets I=20= > have heard > that I liked had been played a lot.=A0 Do they start out needing a = fair=20 > amount of > use to develop?=A0=A0 > =A0 Anybody wanna make a suggestion between these two? > Thanks, > > Ed Foote RPT > > =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 Ed > =A0=A0=A0=A0 OK.=A0 I guess I'll be the contrairian and say that I = have more=20 > people requesting the removal of the Abels in favor of the sound you=20= > say your client wants. The complaint is too loud too harsh.=A0 Often=20= > it's true the voicing hasn't been worked on enough but also the Abels=20= > I've worked with take sooo much needling (pulverizing) what could=20 > possibly be left of the reselience we say is important. Dunno > Though I'm keenly aware of anti -lacquering sentiments among many The=20= > Isaac hammer and Ronsen hammers at times even though they might=20 > require light solutions produce a sound that is voicing stable and=20 > neeling is accomplished easily. Any tech following a properly treated=20= > set of these hammers should not have trouble needling as needed and=20 > nor shoulf=A0 the lacquer be detected unless it was of course over = done.=20 > I personally find clients attracted to this kind of a sound which is=20= > clear=A0 and strong but not glassy or too round. If you guys=A0 are=20 > getting this kind of sound with some version of Abels I don't know=20 > about please enlighten me.!! > =A0=A0=A0=A0 In spite of that comment I've worked on sets that even = after the=20 > pulverizing sounded very good (Mason & Hamlin A) ,however that set=20 > required substantial & relatively deep needling across the top of the=20= > hammer thru out the tenor & treble but not as much in the bass. > =A0=A0 As Del & others have intimated previuosly, the stiffness of = hammer=20 > required to produce a specific kind of sound in any=A0 piano really=20 > depends on the soundboard stiffness and other factors. > =A0=A0=A0=A0 I currently have a 6 ft 6 inch grand in house that has = Abels that=20 > have been needled nicely=A0 and=A0 great deal by a previous tech.but = the=20 > client is unhappy with the brightness=A0 & is considering changing = them.=20 > Another extenuating factor is that the hammers were made very light=20 > (on purpose-geometry)(note 52 is 5.3 grams) resulting in the problem=20= > of not enough mass to push the string in a piano this large with a=20 > sound board this stiff. They sound fairly good (especially in the=20 > bass) but the client has a bright room and these particular hammers=20 > have more than one problem (toostiff too light)creating an unpleasant=20= > sound in the treble. The other piano in shop is a Conover 77 & has=20 > either a set is of Abels or Imdagawa. The hammers are relatively new=20= > and incredibly difficult to get needles in the high tenor & treble.=20 > The sound is strident. I can't detect any lacquer/plastic solutions.=20= > Again the client is displeased with the sound after the new hammers=20 > were installed. I will try to needle them but with felt that stiff its=20= > often not productive nor fun. > =A0=A0 Hey Ed I'm sure you probably don't need my advice but this is = my=20 > two cents worth. Let us know how what you decide on in=A0 the C-3 and=20= > how it comes out. > =A0=A0 Dale ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 6812 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/cb/b0/4e/ea/attachment.bin ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC