[pianotech] Hammer strike line. Was-----whatever

David Love davidlovepianos at comcast.net
Wed Feb 10 18:38:21 MST 2010


One interesting thing that I'm beginning to notice is that there is an
interaction between grain angle, assembly stiffness and hammer tolerance.
For example, I've built boards of varying stiffness in terms of rib scales
altering the grain angle (from 50 to 60 degrees--bass cutoffs are standard)
and have noticed that the boards with higher grain angles seem to be less
hammer tolerant no matter what the stiffness factor in the ribs.  That's
interesting to me, if true.  I have noticed that a change in the grain angle
seems to change the balance of partials, the timbre as it were.  A higher
grain angle does make the panel stiffer (clearly) even to the degree that
higher grain angles tend to increase the need for bass floats (or more
aggressive panel thinning), especially in smaller pianos.  But more than
that it appears to me that the upper partials, especially through the tenor,
take on a much more dominant role the higher the grain angle.  In that
situation it seems that a soft hammer doesn't prevent the board from
producing a strong set of upper partials as it will in a board that is
somewhat less stiff.  That means that when you go to a hard hammer the upper
partials become too dominant, the fundamental relatively weak and it sounds
unpleasant, even clangy.  Why this seems to happen with grain angle shifts
and not with increasing the rib stiffness I can't really say, I've simply
made note of it.  My current formulas have backed off on the grain angle
changes somewhat (though they are still increased from an often seen 45
degrees but not as much as 60 degrees on anything under 7') and kept the rib
scales still in the light-mid to midrange for low tension scales like
Steinway.  While that hasn't put me in the realm of Premium Blue or stock
Abel hammers it has allowed me to prepare hammers with a somewhat more
aggressive attack without any problems.  

Of course, all of these variables are really difficult to isolate but this
is a trend I'm beginning to take note of and it does have implications for
building concert venue instruments where a sharper attack is more the
requirement.   


David Love
www.davidlovepianos.com

-----Original Message-----
From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf
Of Ron Nossaman
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 5:06 PM
To: pianotech at ptg.org
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Hammer strike line. Was-----whatever

erwinspiano at aol.com wrote:
> but I'd call it definitely at the light end of RC&S, which I think is 
> why the hammer line deviation made a tonal difference. You have 16 ribs 
> here, on a 7-1/2' piano.

That, I can't explain, unless it's weight. Those are wide 
ribs. I stiffened my boards up considerably from the first 
attempts to make them more hard hammer tolerant, and it 
worked. Some folks want more bite than Bacon felt Ronsens 
provided. The lighter builds sounded nasty with harder hammers 
than that.


> *  * *Adding two more ribs to the set with the all the ribs spaced 
> differently would be adequate to support the treble. Why that 
> would prefer a less stiff hammer is a bit of a question. Nick and I have 
> often asked each other how stiff is too stiff?*

As long as the assembly's light, and can bend at the 
perimeter, I'm not altogether sure it can be built too stiff.


> * Experience to me says, the stiffer the board the stiffer/denser the 
> hammers need to be. The more flaccid the board the less dense hammers. 

Mine too, and still does.


> SO your experience* _is_* that adding two more ribs to a S&S C set 
> somehow defeats the need for a level of hammer stiffness I am 
> uncomfortable with. 

Nope. I'm saying I found I could still use a soft hammer, but 
gained the potential to use a slightly harder hammer. I'd 
still call Renner Blues and Abels way out of the ballpark for 
my builds.


>  *Meaning ribs less tall or not as long because of a fish??*

Not as long. Length, as apposed to depth or thickness. 
Shorter=stiffer and lighter, automatically.


> Beats fighting the original though, don't it? 
>  *Yes and the the attractive sound that Steinways are know for is 
> enhanced focus and clear and folks just love it. Makes my Day to be sure 
> and certain.*

My day's a long way from made then. I've still got plenty to 
learn.
Ron N



More information about the pianotech mailing list

This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC