Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Tuner-Technicians Forum Dissecting the Tone of Piano Hammers

Belief should not play any role in this.


Nice one. so you put some kind of plastic solution into the hammer and it does a thing and you think you know what it does, because you're the one who did it.

That's fine when you are the only one servicing the piano, which is usually the case when you service private customers.

Not so much when it comes to institutional pianos, such as recording studios, concert halls, universities, music schools etc. You have a number of technicians working on that specific piano over the years and I have yet to see a piano that a technician left with detailed documentation about what he did to the piano. Usually that's irrelevant anyway when it comes to regulation and tuning, those are obvious things that have long ago been standardized and anything there can be reversed with out any traces of the previous technician left.

Not so much with hammers. Unless you have this detailed documentation you are basically left with a black box and nothing you will do to it will have any guaranteed results, because you have no idea what's in the black box and how its ingredients interact with your own secret sauce.

That's my main gripe with the whole chemical approach. It may actually be easier for your everyday work, but for any other technician working on that instrument is going to be a nightmare.

I'd rather have a common ground on how to do things on a concert grand that is accepted among piano makers and concert technicians and thus achieve a high level of consistency over a wide range of instruments. There is no such standardized methodology about putting chemicals into a hammer and of course every technician is convinced that his special secret sauce is the only right secret sauce. It's a recipe for a pianist's worst nightmare when it comes to recording and concertizing on instruments that are completely inconsistent with the way his previous piano played, felt and sounded like.

There is a reason why the overwhelming majority of outstanding pianists record on European pianos prepared by European technicians: They know what to expect - and if the instrument's preparation does not provide what they are looking for, any really good concert technician will be able to fix that issue within a very short time, because he knows what's inside the action, specifically the hammers.

Maybe that's a point you should consider when praising the secret sauce.

You make a good practical point OE1FEU. However, you are describing a notice problem instead of whether chemical voicing should be used.

If, hypothetically, chemical voicing is superior (easier on the hammers, lasts longer, takes less time, more even, better tone, etc.) would it still be better to stick with the old needling methods? I think the answer would be yes if the goal is to maintain an atmosphere that's easy for current techs to navigate. But if the goal is to achieve the best result, then no. In that case, shouldn't we devise some sort of system where techs must leave notice to the next tech about what method was last used on the hammers? Maybe this is not realistic yet, but that shows a deficiency in tech-to-tech communication, not in chemical voicing.

It's, as you say, hypothetical.

I have yet to play and hear the outstanding concert grands that were treated that way and received unanimous applause by renowned pianists.

Until then, I'd rather stick to the traditional and methodological approach that produces reproducible results.

How would you know? Surely you do not know the maintenance history of every piano you have run across.

By the way, you have mentioned that you work in the piano industry. Forum rules state that you should state your affiliation in a signature.

All I'm saying is that analytical knowledge and empirical knowledge go hand in hand. Each can reinforce each other. Scientific progress can not progress without both. As a piano rebuilder, you are most concerned with empirical knowledge, but analytical knowledge can lead to better hammers, better action components, better scale designs, and so forth. I honestly don't know why this statement would be considered controversial.

Upper (higher frequency) partials die off more quickly. Thus a too hard hammer will produce a tone with less sustain.

I would know by getting consistent reports from pianists, but first of all by some kind of consistent test set up that allows anyone to get to an informed impression about what's going on. I've worked in the computer industry for more than 20 years and did so with an exclusive focus on open source. To come to an informed impression and follow up with a procedure that can actually be implemented on a large scale, I think that it's necessary to exclude any proprietary formula from that. So far it's secret sauce and I have yet to hear a single recording or performance on an actual concert grand that provides a testing environment to provide that. I am open and have good ears, but those ears need to be fed and so far there hasn't been anything but hot air.


I have chosen not to do so, because I am not an official representative of Bechstein.

I have been member of this forum way before I started working for Bechstein. Whenever the name of Bechstein came up and I felt had to contribute something, I've made it clear in an explicit disclaimer that I work for the company, but that I am not involved in Sales, Marketing, Production and R&D, thus making it clear that nothing I say can and should be taken as an official Bechstein statement and that it's me as a private individual who wrote something.

So far I have not been contacted by the forum people and received this request and unless you are on the board of those who rule over the forum, I'd say that I am consistent with the spirit of not hiding my affiliation, but also making it clear that I am not here as an official representative.

My private piano is a Steinway, my first concert grand was a Yamaha CF-II and my first grand ever was an 1874 Bechstein.

If you feel that I am not acting in good faith and that my message that I act as a private individual isn't clear enough, then you should report me to the people running the forum, not pointing your fingers at me in public, when I have been completely transparent all the way through.

Should the ones running the forum decide that my non-signature is inappropriate, then I will clearly refrain from posting here at all without any exception and just keep on reading. I cannot and will not establish a Bechstein-signature, when I am not authorized to do so and when I would find it counterproductive to my activities in this wonderful forum.

I hope this statement is good enough for you and the rest of the wonderful people of this forum.

OE1FEU, Thanks for explaining your industry position. I don't see any problem with how you present yourself.

I do disagree with your contention that Europe has highly standardized and productive tone regulation protocols. I have heard European technicians express as wide a diversity of approaches to the skill as I am familiar with here in the States.

I do regret what I see as the German school of piano design that has swept the Asian factories. The overly wide scale sticks and unison spacings. The low leverage actions. The dense felt hammers. The overly heavy case construction. The too numerous single strings in the bass. And the very dangerous huge steam roller casters that allow people to move the piano at too high a speed for safety.

Most of these things affect the tone regulation and feel. And they really affect how stable the tone quality is over time.

A pianists report from a one time experience on a concert stage leaves much wanting as regards long term ownership value. Without private people buying pianos, depending on the concert stage market is a disaster of a business plan.

And how do you explain the success 19th and early 20th century piano makers had with the lighter, softer hammers used then?

Thank you for addressing this.

I am privileged to be a close friend with someone who owns what is probably the most exceptional collection of 19th century concert grands there is on this planet. His collection comprises Bösendorfer, Streicher, Röhnisch, Blüthner, Graf, Ehrbar and of course Erards. And since he is not only a collector of dead wood, but also a pianist with Funérailles in his repertoire and a master piano builder - all his pianos are there to be played on. No restraints, so when you want to know what the Liszt sonata sounded like at the time of his first performance, the 1851 Streicher is the instrument to go for.

Visiting this collection and getting to know it intimately changed my whole perception of pianos, piano playing, the piano literature and the way of how to approach a piano as a player.

I've played 'Le Gibet' on his 1879 Erard and that in itself was something worth more than 10 piano professor lessons. Anyone interested in the piano should definitely get to know faithfully restored instrument from that era, when piano went through its magical transformation, i.e. between 1860 and 1890.

My 1886 Steinway was rebuilt with new Renner hammers and those were were mercilessly reduced in width to match the instrument as it was supposed to be back then 130 ago. Plays like a dream.

Did you not watch the video? There was a clear transformation throughout of the piano being voiced. Todd told me he has been doing this method for 10 years now. There is a video of Famous Concert Pianist Dino Kartsonakis testing Todd's piano that was just voiced with this method. The reaction is priceless.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10216755515656463&id=1119521370


You obviously dislike the idea of chemical voicing, so why participate? Just to tear down? Is that why the derogatory label "Secret Sauce?" Why not try to build up? I shared Todds method in the 2 videos for the purpose of others to try it. Give their feedback. Try it on a few pianos tell others how it holds up. You may like it better. You may not. Its not expensive to try either, less than $50.

I'm sure Emery will give valuable feedback. That's the idea.


The idea that chemical voicing makes the hammer unserviceable in the future is absurd. Many, Many, techs are using B-72 these days. Heck, Dale Erwin sells the stuff. So you're just not well informed on that. Plus, just because a hammer has been voiced with B-72 or All Fabric softener, doesn't mean that a future technician can't destroy them again with needles. They can.


Most of my clients are RPT's and Universities. So I have to be ultra precise because all of my pianos get scrutinized. The Students at the 3 Universities I provide pianos for play on my pianos around the clock and so my main criteria is for durability. They allow me to try new things and when I do I quickly know if it fails or not. For example, the LTHR system failed miserably. The touch was unacceptable, and the wear and tear was worse than normal. The recommended tapering of the hammer in the LTHR destroys backchecks at this high playing load.

I'll get feedback soon enough on Todds voicing method. But I know a winner when I see one.

-chris

Here are the ingredients that I used in the class. However, the airbrush is too small and I had to go to a 4oz spraygun.


Thanks Emery, got it to work with your help!!!!

Hi Ed. I remain interested in your light hammer method. I discussed it with my tech who is also intrigued, but he worries a hammer that light would lack sufficient mass to move the strings enough. However, when he worked at Callahan's in San Francisco, they did do a lot of hammer weight reducing while Stanwoodizing their action rebuilds, and usually the results were good.

I see you, Ed, as the Liam Neeson of heavy piano hammer rescue with a very particular set of skills you have acquired over a very long career. But I wonder why it has to be that way. It would be far more efficient for the hammer to be formed to the proper shape and weight during the manufacturing process, than to be redone later by a rebuilder however highly skilled. Any idea why none of the hammer companies are making hammers lighter if they obviously sound and play so much better? Plus, with all the piano brands out there, it is tough to differentiate yourself from the crowd. I would think that any intrepid piano manufacturer would jump at something that gives them a leg up on the competition, and ordering lighter hammers for their pianos seems like a relatively inexpensive modification.

My guess is that the Chinese piano manufacturers are the most open to change, since they're accustomed to building pianos to design specs imposed upon them by other countries' stencil brands. I wonder if one of the brands coming out of China would be open to a LightHammer model. It sounds cool, and I bet lots of people would be interested to check them out. I definitely would, especially if I got one signed by Ed McMorrow. Heck, the "Hailun Ed McMorrow LightHammer Concert Series" sounds awesome. What do you think, Ed?

Quite a bit of that Everclear is gone, Chris. Are you sure it all went into the piano?

Chris,

you're right, I am wrong.

Yesterday I tried out Hairspray for the hammertips and must warn you: don't take too much ;-) Wait at least 15 minutes bevor judging the result...

Chernobieff Piano, how long did you wait before doing the next pass?

Andymania,

There's no set time, your ear decides.

Some examples:
During the class, Todd sprayed about 8 passes. After a pass, he would go onto a show and tell, and he would check the results anywhere from 5 to 15 minutes later and determine the next step.

In a regular shop day, i'll spray and usually check the results anywhere from an hour to the next day.

The day after the Todd class, the piano had brightened up a little and I made a quick pass with the 1-1-1, at that point, I was very happy with it. Here we are a month later and it still sounds great.

Hope that helps. Enjoy the new process!

-chris

Here's a newly discovered tip, as i'm not sure if this has ever been tried before. But I think many may find this useful.

Pictured is an old Steinway hammer i had laying in a box. The shoulders had been lacquered to death and were hard as rocks. I decided to see if the 1-1-1 fabric softener solution would penetrate the lacquer induced hardness. It did and improved the sustain almost immediately.

It doesn't take very much either, as the 1-1-1 wicks very well. But if you have old and tired hammers, this brings them back to life a bit. Which could be useful in some circumstances.

-chris

A picture is a thousand words.

Did you spray from the sides of that hammer or the shoulders??

Ron Koval

Todd recommends spraying the shoulders of the hammers. With the action out and hammers at rest, 4 passes from the front of the action, and 4 passes from the back. Takes about 1-2 minutes to do the entire set of hammers. I put a long towel over the backchecks and another on the shanks so nothing but the hammer felts get sprayed.