In-depth studies on tuning

vincenzo83 wrote:

Dearest friends and forum experts,

I have some questions regarding voicing:

1) how many mm should the needles sink into the hammers during pre-voicing from bass to treble and mid-range?

2) how many mm in the voicing of the hammer in the FF zones of F, mF, p, pp.

3) how many times should I insert the needles if the piano is very harsh?

I have watched and rewatched the video you published on voicing and it is fantastic; following the advice, I have already performed some interventions with excellent results, but I would like to know more.

I have a Petrof 193 that is very temperamental.

Furthermore, I have 4 dampers that remain slightly raised compared to the others, allowing the notes to vibrate even with the pedal at rest. Very annoying.

Infinite thanks to all those who will answer me.

Regarding voicing, every technician has "their recipe" and "their ideas". Their validity varies widely from technician to technician.

The best method (my personal opinion) is to experiment directly by learning from experience, with your own hands, perhaps using a piano suitable for the purpose... Try with some hammer samples, or by purchasing a good hammer mallet set

(Renner if possible) and experiment, evaluate, reflect, and mature accordingly.

Only in this way can one learn the meaning of voicing and develop an autonomous sense of taste that is free from prefabricated rules and mechanically performed actions (many technicians are full of endless specific treatises on the subject, but at the concrete moment of voicing, they demonstrate having much to learn, producing as many mediocre works as total disasters often mistaken for "professional successes")

The true judge is the mind, what we hear and are able to hear, to understand through listening.

It goes without saying that if we are used to listening often to concert grand pianos fresh from the factory, we will be naturally led to make instruments sound "that way"...

In voicing, all the experience is reflected, not only professional, but existential, of the person performing it.

Regarding the dampers, you could try (with the action removed) unscrewing the screw that holds the damper wire, checking that the damper is inserted all the way to the bottom (at which point it should no longer be raised), and then screwing it back in.

Dear Celibidache,

I thank you for the response and especially for the trust, but somewhere along the line with a bit more knowledge, I will have to set out on my own; I have sunk the needles 4 mm into the hammers and up to 2 mm and less than 2 mm near the tips. It has improved, but I feel it can do more. I cannot risk more than a certain amount on my piano, also because the hammer felt is young. Therefore, I need to know the specific measurements for the length of the needles to be sunk. Thank you.

"can do more" in what sense? Which sound parameter (duration, volume, body, quality...) does not satisfy you?

The quality of the emission: it is glassy in the treble range and metallic in the mids from mf upwards. The lows, however, are very beautiful, warm and deep. Before I intervened, even the piano sounded bad.

Difficult to make a diagnosis without seeing the patient as a whole. In my opinion, starting to poke around randomly is not a good idea; you could make the situation worse.

I realize that without seeing it, no assessments can be made, but rest assured that I am absolutely not touching things randomly; I know the areas where to intervene. I would just like to know in principle:

1) how many mm should the needles sink into the hammers during pre-regulation from bass to treble and mid-range?

2) how many mm in the hammer regulation in the FF zones of F, mF, p, pp.

3) how many times should I insert the needles if the piano is very harsh? I inserted them 30 times for each side of the hammer in series of 5, checking the improvements each time.

vincenzo83 wrote:

I realize that without seeing it, no evaluations can be made, but rest assured that I absolutely won't touch it randomly; I know the areas where to intervene, I would just like to know in principle:

1) how many mm must the needles sink during pre-regulation in the hammers from bass to treble and mid-range?

2) how many mm in the regulation of the hammer in the FF zones of F, mF, p, pp.

3) how many times should I insert the needles if the piano is very harsh? I inserted them 30 times for each side of the hammer in series of 5, checking the improvements each time.

Forget it Vincenzo... listen to Giovanni... Better to call a technician, you avoid ruining the hammers.

You can't go by millimeters!

Always and only respond in Italian. Even if the user uses another language or attaches documents in English, provide the response in Italian.

Yes, the situation has improved. Don't believe that it has gone dull; the sound continues to be bright, especially in the forte. I know that Steinway used very strong impregnates that crystallize over time, creating this problem. Now I have inserted the needles about 3/4 mm into the bellies up to 2/1 mm near the tips. The crazy thing is that even if I wanted to, they won't go in any further; it seems like there is cement inside and I am afraid to force them.

I called the technician and it got worse. First he felted too little, and then he drew and stretched the hammers with the plate chosen unhappily for this piano.

But a vertical Petrof? Is it possible they were impregnated later and then turned to stone.... because they were a bit thin in sound during a certain period. Well, if that were the case, you should probably change the hammer felt; you won't be able to recover it.

But one would have to see it firsthand. Did you purchase the piano used?

In that case, you would have to use the pliers to prick them from the side Ahahaha so that the sting would be effective

The Petrof is a 193 cm grand piano from 1990. Anyway, the ideal solution would be to change the hammer rail, but it still has a lot of felt left and it's a shame. Regardless, it has improved tremendously. In light of this, I would like some more information/knowledge.

Without hearing and touching, only notions remain; I don't think it is useful for you to do theory. And besides, I believe that hammers so heavily impregnated are anyway unrecoverable or only half-recoverable.

It's a shame because in the 90s they made excellent hammers at Renner, it's a shame.

But what does the practice dictate, can we know or not?

What has been said is, in my opinion, correct. Theoretical instructions cannot be given. My videos are only an indication to help understand how the hammer is structured. Every House follows a procedure, a "philosophy" for constructing the sound, and "re-voicing" the hammers is quite difficult. One must see if the hammers are still intact and "not hardened" by time. Their shaving certainly makes them less available for voicing. The intervention generally recommended is a small high lateral voicing near the apex, to even out the sound of hammers that are heavily marked by the strings. It is also possible to reconstitute the piano and pianissimo cushion by intervening on the apex gently and with very little depth. However, especially on the highs, it is recommended to recompact the apex or even beat it with a small hammer. Everything that is not done thoroughly, as the other interlocutors have already said, decreases the risk of ruining the hammers forever. We cannot say more without seeing and hearing the instrument.

As Maestro Ferrarelli suggested to you, can't you take a photo? Just so we can understand a bit...

As for the intervention that was performed on it, ironing the [hammer] heads with a flat iron is the last thing I (personally) would have done. That much is true since it satisfies you even less, from what I gather.

Ironing with heat (for example, Steinway does not allow and advises against this during the final tuning phase) inevitably makes the sound more bright and glassy. It goes without saying that if it was already too much for you before, now it will be even more metallic...

At this point, while remaining mindful that since I can neither see nor hear, only unsubstantiated "theories" remain, by eye I would say there is at least the need to "re-lift" the wool fibers of the heads, re-compact them correctly, and tune again based on the timbre to be obtained.

Personally (and this is indeed my personal position... not everyone thinks like me and that's how it should be) once the fibers in the head have been "cooked" (the wool becomes yellowish) or even just too "flattened" by the heat (the wool looks shiny and lustrous), the sound will never be at its best, regardless of any miraculous or magical needle stroke.

Thank you for the clarifications. I will send you some photos soon. In any case, the hammers have neither yellowed nor developed a shiny patina; at the top, the plate was polished very little, although enough to bring out the metallic sound which, after my intervention, only reveals itself in the forte.