Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Tuner-Technicians Forum Why and why not adding lead weight to key

Thanks A443. You're all heart.

BKW58,
The old Steinways had very light hammers and higher than average leverage, compared to most other pianos. If when I rebuild one I use new parts that include heavier hammers and reduced leverage-I have just made a "Steinwas".

The great tradition of instrument making is to use the best materials and methods that produce the most dynamic, colorful, stable and long lasting tone qualities. That is the tradition I employ.

Now which way is the "Steinway " or "Steinwas"?

I apologize for A443 being rude. That is a bit of "forum effect" probably.

While I understand how/why many pianists and technicians fall victim of a corporate cult, pseudo-religious kind of mentally, there becomes a point at which it simply goes too far.

Espousing marketing mantra, without any thought or reason, and expecting other to buy those beliefs without using common sense is an affront to everything I have and continue to work for. Professional pianists need/want better pianos. They deal with what they are given, and there is nothing they can do about it. They are not getting the performance instruments they need because it would cost the manufacturer money to bring the quality back up to where it should be--it is simply a money issue.

I find it disgusting that my professional pianist friends, who devote their entire existence to their art, suffer on stage because making a better piano would slightly reduce corporate profits. This is a serious issue very close to my heart: I've devoted my entire life to uncovering piano knowledge that has been purposefully buried to save a few bucks--it is not a forum effect!

By admission, Bkw58 hasn't yet to experience these 'new' parts for himself, yet he allowed the effects of cooperate brainwashing to dictate his writings on the matter. The way I express myself may seem harsh, but to me, this is a very serious social injustice that I will continue to stand against. Bkw58, this is not personal, it is intellectual.

A443 - Why do you keep assuming that performing pianists are all suffering when playing fine pianos in excellent condition? It is simply not true that all performance pianos, in most parts of the world, aren't kept in excellent condition.

You really need to get out more and really find out what is available rather than constantly implying that you are the only one who has any skills. You rant on about what you perceive to be the condition of pianos in performance spaces.

It is simply untrue.

I think that if pianists are not happy with an instrument they ask it to be tweaked to their liking.

Usually the grands that come from Hamburg are well regulated and relatively stable.

They certainly can have left a few defects but shoul not cause problems.

If you look at the parts ratios, the alignments, in a Steinway grand, there are things that looks they are not right.

But it works because of a certain number of points that are respected while regulating them. The sum of the operations makes the instrument responsive and musical.

When it comes to synthetic material whippens, on one side they look as a huge improvment, on the other they filter what comes from the string/hammer impact to the key, giing a more "dstant" sensation, less "direct" may be.
While it is certainly not a big concern, it is not my ideal of expressive instrument, where all that wooden noise and ibration feedback are coherent between the key an the hammer, mostly because they are all the same material.

You have more eveness, more ease to regulate (plus the extraordinary good idea for location an choice of whippen heel and knuckle from WNG) , but I regret the synthetic part is present in the touch as something "different" .
May be only because wooden whippens are vibrating , deforming as the wooden hammer shank, while the synthetic
parts are more rigid)

On the weight side, the wooden ones are lighter, while it may not count much at that point.

Regards.

Marty,
Do you think a 10YO Steinway D in a climate controlled concert hall that is used an average of 15 hours a week should be retired? That it somehow is no longer able to serve performing pianists? Steinway sales rep's often suggest this to concert venues based upon their experience with the C&A fleet, which causes many pianos to be damaged by all the moving and environmental changes they are subject to. But there are other reasons.

If so what would they be?

The way contemporary performing pianos are tone regulated is what is "wearing" them out. The old Steinways had lighter hammers in general and they last longer, and they take less hammer voicing to meet pianists needs.

Why you are so hostile to technicians who are treating pianists with great respect by trying to bring back and improve what is proven to work best for them? And many of these same technicians are trying to move the technology forward for the benefit of pianists.

Yet you persist in calling us "arrogant" or "self-promoters".

Fools we may well be!

Sure a hammer set in a concert hall is to be changed after 12 years of frequent evening of voicing or tweaks, they rarely are left more than 15. assuming the tech knows his job.

Now the ones that are moved so often for concert rental are in need of more care, not always done soon enough because of time constrain. But done at some point certainly.

And private rental "concert service" need to have some concert pianos less than 12 years old to have the agreement.

That is mostly to propose pianos that are in their best tonal range, before they stabilize in a slightly quieter mood D, then for decades.

New German pianos have generally a soundboard that is internally loaded with energy to the max, they have a "fast" voice, that may loose a little of that speed in that 12 years period.

But even then they are not "slow" soundboards.

Ed, I wasn't addressing anything you said. In fact, this is to what I was responding:



A bit over the top, perhaps?

As a performing pianist, I simply do not find this to be the case. On the whole, performance pianos are kept in admirable condition. The world is not crashing down because of poorly kept performance pianos!

Performing pianists are not suffering in anything other than rare occasions. You, and others, are totally missing the point that I commend the fine tuner/techs who keep those instruments in performance ready condition. However, the legion of those who can work at a high level is not as small as you or others imply.

Any manufactured item can be tweeked. However, that is not due to poor quality or poor design, it is simply a difference in concept of the design and the manufacture of any product.

I simply do not believe that all new pianos need to be redesigned and/or be subjected to extensive rebuilding. Concert prep is different than a total re-do. The situation is not nearly as dire as you, and others, are implying.

What I have stated is based on my many years as a performing pianist. I am not without considerable experience and expertise.

A443:

Invariably you read into my posts things that are not there. I have neither the time nor the inclination to bandy words, and so lately I've let your comments slide. However, yours of today calls for a statement after which there shan't be another.

Your remark above is a specious syllogism based upon my reply to Ed on the previous page of this thread (p4).

I have experience with the so-called "new parts," carbon fibre, et al, first in harpsichord service and then in pianos. Specifically, I have no experience with Ed's S&S new rebuilds with his choice and use of new non-S&S parts. Nothing more. Nothing less. For this reason I have asked him if one of his S&S rebuilds might be in an area of TN. I plan to be in that area in the near future. My desire is to ascertain whether or not the touch in question is present in his S&S rebuilds. If it is, then fine. If not, then that's okay too.

If this not clear to you then so be it.

Thank you, Isaac. There is no need for you to apologize. (That you do so speaks well of you.) Best wishes,

Greetings,
There are several in the practice rooms, several more out in the general public, and I think we may be moving one into an on campus facility in the very near future. Practice rooms will get their two year or three regulation before September, but that mainly consists of turning the capstans up a little. Sometimes the let-off needs to be gone through, too,but otherwise,the composite parts seem to just sit there, unfazed by the use.
Regards,

Testing was certainly done, but I wonder what tonal result can be expected by balancing the keys with some front weight plus weight at the back.

Sure the keys may flex more, but can it send more power to the whippen/hammer, ue to more mass ?

I have read that the initial success of leading FortePianas was the raise in tone power (or apparent raise , I cannot really figure), but the more you feel the key the less the hammer acceleration is "at the tip of the fingers"

As a process to lighten anything, no, it does not, it provides more inertia that can help the sensations up to some point.

Sometime the piano is played lightly and slowly, that are the only conditions where the perfect leading is perceived.
What is "funny" is that as soon you begin to accelerate more, all the unevenness show up suddenly, jump at you, ratio difference between sharps and white keys, lead placement differences, may be if the hammers moldings are leaded this is also a cause of unevenness, the lead is not on the CG but lower and farther from the axis, so unless all hammers are leaded....

The contrast between the perfect balancing and the sudden dynamic behavior is surprising.

Anyway when I tested I perceived different dynamics, and as all hammers where not leaded the same that created unevenness and also some damping of the wood noise. It of course lowered the resonance frequency of the assembly so more low partials where exited, as when a shank is cut to the size of a match.

I took out the lead and the tone opened. The wood resonance may have more activity than we believe.

I couldn't have said it any better myself! Thank you Marty for expressing my very thoughts and saving me the trouble of another diatribe to A443

Of the hundreds of concert pianists I have worked with over the years (i.e., professional artists that devote their entire existence to their art) none of them share either of your sentiments about piano excellence on concert stages these days. Of course there are some well maintained pianos out there; that is not the point--the vast majority of them are not! I am speaking from my experience.

How many times, SMHaley, have concert pianists contacted you in an hysterical panic because the local 'concert technician' couldn't get the piano to function? How many times have you dropped everything you were doing, hopped on a plane, and worked 50+ hours non-stop on a piano so that it would function in a concert? We are not talking about high standards here: we are talking about basic functionality. I don't get called-in when the pianos are fine, I get called-in when there is no hope, no one can help, and the pianist is on a verge of a mental break down because the keys don't go up-and-down. Shame on both of you for questioning my resolve and dedication to the arts.

Do you think I do that for the money? You think there is any money in doing that? My assistants and I do want we can to help great artists--most of whom I am proud to call close friends--when they plead for our help. Sometimes it comes at an even greater cost: about five years ago, when we were about c.70 hour [straight] into emergency concert prep, one of my assistants fell into a very serious lack of sleep-induced seizure while working on stage. All of the violent uncontrolled jerking about on the ground, loss of awareness/communication, foaming at the mouth, complete unresponsiveness, was a rather traumatic experience to go through and witness. It continued until after the police and paramedics arrived to rushed him to be hospitalised; I had to stay on stage and finish the work.

Neither of you may appreciate the work that I do, but then again, neither of you know me or my work. Everything I write about comes from own personal experience. If you don't like it, please ignore my posts entirely (i.e., instead of starting in with the defamatory sentiments).

If you'd like to discuss issues relating to piano technology and the piano performing arts, that's great! That is what I am here for: there aren't very many places/ways to learn about many of the things that I have discussed so far on this site (i.e., this is clearly not book knowledge; it comes through thoughtful experiences). There is plenty more to talk about.

SMHaley, I am still waiting to hear how wide you think piano hammers should be and how to determine that size exactly (i.e., since you also like to contradict my statements without any evidence and forethought). Let's discuss it. Hammers that are too wide have a detrimental cascading affect on the entire system. How much have YOU thought about that? Before I start, what kind of insight can you share with the public on the matter?

But, hammers are wide for mass reasons, even if a part of the head is not used directly .

Centering them is possibly an advantage in time for wear, an gives a more even tone, string by string, but I stopped to think that was so important to have the 3 strings with exactly similar spectra, as long they have the same power and +- same dynamics.

There are limitations in the large dimension of the strike line, if the strings where to be more spaced at the strike, the keyboard would be larger and as it cannot really be done what happens is that the blocks are larger and the keys have a more pronounced angle, which is not excellent.

Now if the goal anyway is to have lighter hammers, sure there is some mass that can be shaped and taken out, but not all along the scale in my opinion. Also, less sharp hammers of today may be need more large felt to preserve the "active" felt rebound .

I have seen more too thick hammers in the 80's pianos than today.
That said I would not be surprised that some gremlin push the ankle of the designer when he is pouring himself a glass of hammer mass, and then he drops a little more mass, so there will be a little more power, you know the story... "the instrument can stand it" , and we finish with a 30g UW in basses...

Standards where and may be still are missing about the mass of the key, not for its inertia itself but as a sign of unue leverage somewhere.
Anyway if they exist it is only in the local culture of some factory. Out of the Stanwood measurements, this is not a common concept, while we talk in "number of leads" in the keys to say something about it.

I have been skeptical of A443's credentials since this exchange.

BDB, can you not observe the response of the piano by how the pianist uses her body? Did you not notice how she moved her muscles? Or how quickly in acceleration the keys moved to correspond with her input? You think that is a heavy piano right there?

Her arms are slightly lower, she is not having to use gravity to drop into the keys to get sound, she is relaxed, primarily using finger movement to get all the sound variation she needs/wants. She is not fighting with that piano. That is not a typical modern-day setup. Is the piano pretty? No, but it works and that 97 year old is amazing! Let me repeat: the piano works!

I sense that Dorothy's ghost is about to visit us.