Who is the manufacturer

In those times, hammer felt was not marked. It is probably a Renner. Unfortunately, we would need to see the original to replicate the same weights and shapes. That type of Steinway used hammer felt with underfelt up to the last hammer, impregnated laterally with grey impregnant. Therefore, the technician likely sought a hammer felt that reproduced the original. Did he change the keyboard weighting?

It hasn't changed the keyboard weighting; I find myself with 50/49 grams of downweight on the center, 28 for upweight.

The measurements I gave were rough; yesterday I used a caliper and they are actually 11.5 mm wide. The first bass note measures 80 mm, the last treble 68 mm (from tail to head).

the belly of the first bass is 38 mm!!

At first glance they seemed enormous to me, then the underfelt up to the last hammer left me perplexed ...

Today I can't find anything similar in the catalogs....the technician says a hammer felt identical to the original!

Unfortunately, he no longer has the samples. Is the hypothesis of re-felting to be discarded? I am asking out of curiosity

Refelting is absolutely to be discarded. Why are you not satisfied? What do you think is wrong? It is probable that the hammer rail is the same as or similar to the original. Today, however, a hammer rail of that type can be refurbished with very high quality. Old samples are never thrown away!!!! Were the capstans also changed at that time? Tell me, if you want, the Model and serial number. ...And then it would be interesting to examine it... I don't remember your city of residence. The weight values do not seem good to me... but beyond the weights, one must see the response of the action, the friction... and lastly the felt of the jack heels which should be replaced in a certain way. And then the perfect regulation and centering of all parts of the action. Pre-regulation is also important. The final voicing of the hammers is fundamental. On a Steinway, everything is a bit more difficult and some precautions must be observed.

P.S. I have just reviewed the photos of the bass. They seem a bit disproportionate to me. I wouldn't say that hammer rail is suitable for that piano.

Perhaps one can trace back to the one that, in shape and weight as well as drilling, was the original.

Basically it's fine.... I wanted to understand where those hammers came from, which to the eye seem large to me....

Anyway, they are within the regulation limits; I wrote it wrong before, I meant 50 grams downweight and 28 grams upweight (remember the video with the coins? It's that piano)

It is a piano that I purchased already ready... anyway, the centering work etc. has been done. The shanks are the originals, the roller pins have been replaced, an intervention requested by me, respecting the dimensions of the originals....

I would have changed the shanks, but with the hammer rail already mounted 13 years ago, it didn't make sense to unglue it etc....

Of course, a good tuning and voicing could be done with the arrival of good weather, and on that occasion examine it ....I am near Milan.

The Pf is an A188 serial number 195145

With Steinway, is it impossible to trace the necessary information using the serial number even without having the original samples?

Maybe something can be done. We will talk about it

Hello everyone and greetings to Maestro Ferrarelli! I always follow you with great interest, even if I never intervene. However, this time you have touched upon a subject (I might say "a raw nerve") that involves me directly, which, due to dialectically uneducated situations that occurred in the past with some technicians considered competent, I had let drop into nothingness out of sincere tiredness, not to say discouragement.

So, a few years ago I inherited a Hamburg Steinway B from a relative who is no longer with us. The sound was a dream, a typical Grigory Sokolov timbre, nothing like those of today. Then one day, I call the technician from my city's conservatory (of clear and honest reputation) for tuning, and he suggests, given my enthusiasm, replacing the old hammer rail (the same as the one in Fra's photos) with the ones Steinway uses now, made of maple, lighter and more high-performing.

Well, since that day I haven't been able to listen to it for more than 30 seconds. It has become woody, thuddy, devoid of charm; furthermore, the keys have become heavier. It feels like I have ruined a dream and because of this, I cannot bear to hear it.

In the same way, technicians cannot hear me... they say it's fine, that this is how it should sound, and that perhaps it's just me who doesn't remember correctly how it was...

What do you think? Greetings and thank you!

Davide

Steinway hammers are prepared in a certain way. In recent history, Steinway has changed orientation several times: hammers with felt padding, without felt padding, in mahogany, in maple, etc., heavily impregnated, lightly impregnated. And then Steinway achieves that sound by practicing the "radial" voicing of the hammers, which I believe I have already mentioned, but only briefly, in my video tutorials. I also hope for your sake that the old hammer assembly was not thrown away. This is the greatest damage that can be done. In any case, it is possible to trace back to the type originally installed.

Know that I also own a Mod. B and therefore know it very well.

Yours would need to be seen. Anyway, I would like to know the serial number, if you wish.

I would be interested to know where the new hammer assembly was sourced from and how it was "prepared" and voiced. Then one must deal with weights, friction, shape (diamond-shaped), etc.; I will never tire of stating the necessity of these checks.

Another observation: it is possible that it only needs "voicing," something that the technician perhaps overlooked.

Let's stay in touch. It is also possible for me to visit you, free of charge, with only reimbursement for travel expenses, to perform a check-up on your beautiful instrument. You can get other details from me by phone. Leave me a message with your number, if you wish, or call me directly.

bye Paolo

Bye Paolo

Maestro, I sincerely thank you. However, I would never allow myself to trouble you by asking you to come from the other side of Italy for a piano that is almost out of use. To tell the truth, if I found the strength to re-expose the problem to someone, it is precisely for the benefit of "distance": it guarantees the sincerity and disinterestedness of the information being exchanged (more than anything for me; your seriousness, Maestro, is well known).

I am sorry to have to say, believe me Maestro, that all the operations necessary for the preparation of the hammer felt were carried out as prescribed by the Steinway protocol (the concert one, moreover). The technician who intervened has a Steinway diploma and whoever, after him, laid hands on the instrument was nonetheless a competent technician who for generations has cared for the instruments of all the masters/students/enthusiasts in my region.

My point of view diverges radically from theirs, as they like the instrument.

I am certain they are not acting in bad faith; it is simply that for me it was better before, whereas they have a different way of feeling.

There is no tuning or intervention of any kind that can curb such a wide timbral difference (I am a young student, but I don't get "intimidated" easily...) and one would still have to say how different the timbres of current Steinways (it is enough to hear today's Pollini or Schiff) are from those of thirty years ago.

Aside from the tuning, it has also become heavier. (When it was supposed to be the opposite).

And to crown the madness (it was truly unlistenable), I had an Abel [hammer] installed (on different shanks) with more or less similar results (better on the last three high octaves).

This is my adventure. Unfortunately, the original hammers were discarded by the technicians.

I can only say they were "by sight" of the same type as Fra's: mahogany, impregnated and very bulbous.

Good day and thank you.

Davehammerklavier wrote:

Maestro, I sincerely thank you. However, I would never dare to trouble you to come from the other side of Italy for a piano that is almost out of use. To tell you the truth, if I found the strength to re-expose the problem to someone, it is precisely for the benefit of "distance": it guarantees the sincerity and disinterestedness of the information being exchanged (more so for me; your seriousness, Maestro, is well known)

I am sorry to have to say, believe me Maestro, that all the operations necessary for the preparation of the hammer felt were carried out as prescribed by the Steinway protocol (the concert one, moreover). The technician who intervened has a Steinway diploma and whoever, after him, laid hands on the instrument was nonetheless a competent technician who for generations has cared for the instruments of all the masters/students/enthusiasts in my region.

My point of view diverges radically from theirs, as they like the instrument.

I am certain they are not acting in bad faith; it is simply that for me it was better before, whereas they have a different way of hearing.

There is no tuning or intervention of any kind that can curb such a wide timbral difference (I am a young student, but I don't get "intimidated" easily...) and one would still have to say how different the timbres of current Steinways are (it is enough to listen to Pollini or Schiff today) from those of thirty years ago.

Aside from the tuning, it has also become heavier. (When it should have been the opposite).

And to crown the madness (it was truly unlistenable), I had an Abel [felt] installed (on different pins) with more or less similar results (better on the last three high octaves).

This is my adventure. Unfortunately, the original hammers were discarded by the technicians.

I can only say they were "by sight" of the same type as Fra's—mahogany, impregnated, and very bulbous.

Good day and thank you.

I didn't understand, are you saying that the new hammers are heavier compared to the old ones? It should be the opposite (it seems that today's are lighter and more performant, and it wouldn't make sense if it were the contrary since technology progresses and so does knowledge)

Regarding the sound of new Steinways, I have tried several, in Bergamo, in Milan... the feeling is that there is a tendency to slightly "assassinate" the harmonics with excessive acupuncture; I prefer the slightly more open and "struck" sound of my hammer felt (especially between the second and third octave, where I found several pianos almost voiceless in relation to the other sections)."}

Look, regarding the sound, it was like having a wool blanket over the strings. Then they gave it a light impregnation, but although it has opened up a bit, it doesn't even come close to the timbral characteristics of its original hammers.

Regarding the weight, it's evident... would it make sense to compare the weights? I could try weighing one....

Ok I'm curious, do this:

If you can, take down a hammer with a stiletto, the first of the basses for example, and a central one! Do you have a kitchen scale?

I took the first A and the middle D, you should theoretically get a lower weight

Ok I'm curious, do this:

If you can, weigh down a hammer with a stylus, the first of the basses for example, and a central one! Do you have a kitchen scale?

I took the first A and the middle D, you should get a lower weight

Thanks! I went at it cautiously, but in the end I succeeded... these are my hammer weights for no. 01 and no. 68 (20 and 18 grams)

But they are tiny.... And heavier!!!!

Pianoexpert, what do you say?

I am not a technician, I don't know if it depends on this, but the main unpleasant sensation was exactly that of having a "smaller" sound, as if we had gone from a high-class three-quarter grand that could be mistaken for a larger piano, to a studio quarter-grand that shrieks like a spinster...

Davehammerklavier wrote:

I'm not a technician, I don't know if it depends on this, but the main unpleasant sensation was precisely having a "smaller" sound, as if we had gone from a high-class three-quarter grand that could be mistaken for a larger piano, to a studio quarter-grand that shrieks like a spinster...

Ahahah, but what are your downweight and let-off weights?

The technician who sold it to me said he had requested a replica of the original hammer rail; my curiosity was to understand where it came from.... and if there was something similar on the market....

As for weights, I'm in the same range

if they put a hammer rail that is two grams heavier on yours, since the levers are not too different, you might find yourself with 60 grams!!!

Open content (youtube)

I can't make a video for you, but I've known for some time that there are on average 60 grams in the center of the keyboard.... after looking at the let-off weight a few months ago, I haven't touched it again just so I wouldn't have to think about it...