Evidence of overlacquered hammers

[Sarah Fox]

Hi Bernhard et al.,

Fascinating discussion!

You wrote:

> Yes that´s what i say. As long as you put the same amount of energy into 
> the
> key, the sound will not be louder. This the principle of conservation of
> energy.

and then:

>> > The amount of energy imparted to the string which is
>> > transferred to the soundboard is a function of mass and/or density of
>> > the object striking the string.
>
> Not only. The function includes also the hammer speed and the strings
> impedance (including mass and tension of the string).  If you put in the
> same amount of energy into the key, the speed will be lower so the 
> loudness
> will not change therefore. With a heavier hammer you will get louder lower
> partials, but less higher partials. May that´s why you have the impression
> of a louder sound. But the overall energy does not change.
> Yes that´s what i say. As long as you put the same amount of energy into 
> the
> key, the sound will not be louder. This the principle of conservation of
> energy.

This is all true, of course, but one also has to consider the efficiency of 
energy transfer between the hammer and string.  This depends largely on the 
elasticity of the hammer.  But considering two hammers of similar 
elasticity, I would of course agree.

Having said this, I think there can be huuuuge differences in hammer 
elasticity.  I just finished replacing the hammers on my 9' Wissner.  The 
old hammers were not *too* misshapen, but as a set, they were very 
inconsistent from note to note.  I did put on heavier hammers, but not 
*that* much heavier (about 1 Stanwood level).  The primary difference 
between my old hammers and my new hammers is the felt.  The old felt was not 
of particularly great quality, and it was highly lacquered.  The new hammers 
are of unlacquered Wurzen felt.  Overall, the tonal properties of the two 
hammer sets are similar, sort of.  They are of similar brightness/darkness, 
anyway, although the old ones sound a bit "woody" (for lack of a good term).

The weaknesses of my old hammer set were most apparent in the mid treble, 
which was rather thready.  The last octave had reasonable sustain, 
considering the age of the SB, but not much strength either.  However, one 
really expects and needs strength in the mid treble, and I didn't have it. 
The bass and tenor, by comparison, were very robust.  At the time I bought 
the piano, I had faith <grin> in the problem deriving from the inferiority 
of the hammer set.

I'm happy to report that the new hammer set gives me well balanced sound 
from bottom to top.  (To be more accurate, the top few notes may indeed need 
a bit of filing and/or lacquer.)  The problem with the thready treble has 
been eliminated.  More to the point of the discussion, and to paraphrase 
from an earlier post from someone on this list (regarding Wurzen felt), I've 
got power out the wazoo!  Good lord, if I wanted to, I could now compete 
with the guy across the street with the powerful sound system that delivers 
crystal-clear music to my bedroom at 4:00 AM, at least if I faced the piano 
the other way and opened the window.  ;-)

The difference in power is not a perceptual phenomenon with regard to 
emphasis of different partials.  It's quite profound and real (perhaps by 15 
or 20 dB in the mid treble), and I would say it has to do with the 
differences in elasticity between the two hammer sets.  The unlacquered 
Wurzen felt is simply springier than the (over)lacquered felt, and therefore 
more of the energy reaches the string, instead of burning off in the form of 
heat.

I frankly don't know whether "good" lacquering would have made my old set 
perform well.  The old hammers were visibly soaked (blue-gray) from the 
shoulders to the 9:00 and 3:00 positions.  I didn't do any strike point 
analysis (e.g. with chalk), and it's quite possible that shaping could have 
improved them slightly.  Anyway, I offer these observations for all they are 
worth.  YMMV!!  And no, I have no experience with how these hammers would 
have performed on other scale and SB designs -- only on a 1933 clone of an 
S&S D.

Incidentally, I did try out some Abel samples (both the light and the 
premium), prior to selecting the Wurzens.  They weren't appreciably 
different from the hammers I already had, but I bet they would have largely 
balanced out my mid treble.

Peace,
Sarah