Can cymbals be re-hammered?

[Allan Speers]

Here's an out-there question:

 

Let's say you have a ride cymbal that is ALMOST perfect. just the right balance of ping to wash, good tonal complexity, good basic sound, but it has a few unruly overtones, or whatever...

 

Is there anyone, anywhere, who does custom re-hammering?

 

It seems to me that, if proper hammering is so important, and if most mdern cymbals forgo careful hammering to keep costs down (don't they?) that this would be one heck of a service to offer.

 

I see the kind of prices spizzichino gets. -That's GOT to be mostly due to time-consuming craftsmanship.

 

So?

 

Also, as a general principal, what exactly is hammering supposed to accomplish? I have always assumed it was to get all frequencies to ring evenly. Yes?

[Rod Gervais]

Originally posted by Allan Speers:

Here's an out-there question:

 

Let's say you have a ride cymbal that is ALMOST perfect. just the right balance of ping to wash, good tonal complexity, good basic sound, but it has a few unruly overtones, or whatever...

 

Is there anyone, anywhere, who does custom re-hammering?

 

It seems to me that, if proper hammering is so important, and if most mdern cymbals forgo careful hammering to keep costs down (don't they?) that this would be one heck of a service to offer.

 

I see the kind of prices spizzichino gets. -That's GOT to be mostly due to time-consuming craftsmanship.

 

So?

 

Also, as a general principal, what exactly is hammering supposed to accomplish? I have always assumed it was to get all frequencies to ring evenly. Yes?

Alan,

 

the short answer is "No",

 

Hamering is not done for the reason of "tuning" cymbals - but rather for shaping them.

 

The hammering process takes place prior to lathing the cymbal - creating an evenly shaped surface so the lathe can better do a good job of maintaing an even thickness of the cymbal body.

 

Zildjian no longer has an hand hammering as a part of their manufacturing process....... Paiste claims they do.

 

My guess would be that attempting to take a cymbal, reheating it to allow you to modify it by hammering would (in the end) probably destroy the cymbal anyway.

 

Other's might have more info than i however.

 

Rod

[coyote]

Rod,

You are 100% on-target. The only way to "re-work" a cymbal is to melt it down, and throw it back in the mix.

 

Think of it this way, Allan: If hitting a cymbal with wood sticks eventually destroys it, what would happen with a ballpeen hammer? Unless it's a very thick cymbal, every place the hammer hit it would be seriously weakened - not a problem for a lightly-hit jass ride perhaps, but a serious problem for a rock crash.

 

Originally posted by Rod Gervais:

My guess would be that attempting to take a cymbal, reheating it to allow you to modify it by hammering would (in the end) probably destroy the cymbal anyway.

Others might have more info than i however.

Rod

[Allan Speers]

This is a little hard to accept, though it sounds like you both know what you're talking about. -Are you sure this isn't some kind of "commonly accepted myth?"

 

One problem I have with this explanation is that no lathe is going to have a problem making an even-depth cut. It's absurd to think you'd have to "help" the lathe by hammering first.

 

Problem #2 If you're correct, why do you still see the hammering, the bumps and ridges, on many cybals? (and especially the great ones) If even depth is the goal, why wouldn't they lathe right through the hammering?

 

Problem #3 I doubt you'd want the same thickness through-out the whole cymbal. A guitar top is shape to various thicknesses in differen areas, otherwise it would be one-dimensional.

 

Problem #4: Continuing with the guitar analogy, there are some builders who go inside a finished guitar and snad-off a little material from various sections of some braces. Again, this is done to bring out the resonance of select frequencies. This would absolutely be the same on a cymbal, it's a matter of physics. Whether or not someone actually has tried this is another matter, but it wouldn't necessarily "destroy" the cymbal.

------------------

 

Perhaps this is the explanation: You are correct that hammering happens first, and lathing second.

 

OK, fine, but that does NOT mean that the hammering wasn't done to tune the cymbal. In fact, tuning is the only plausible explanation.

 

Granted, if someone were to hammer after the lathing was done, it might look a little strange, or maybe there's another sonic reason that no-one does it. -But then again, explain why a spiz cymbal is COVERED in hammer marks, to the point that you don't see any lathing ridges. Does he have a magic lathe?

 

I'm not looking for an argument, but I think my points are all valid, so further explanation would be appreciated.

[Siberian]

Allan, there's a really good book (called "The Cymbal Book") that will tell you more about cymbals than you'll EVER want to know ... including the history of cymbals, how they are made, the different types of cymbals, the anatomy of a cymbal, etc.

 

It goes into great detail about the entire manufacturing process and how the sound is effected by different aspects of the construction. I don't recall all of the specifics, as it has been a few years since I read it, it goes pretty in depth about hammering, why it's done, and how it effects the sound of a cymbal.

 

The Cymbal Book

[Allan Speers]

Thanks, siberian.

 

Maybe I'll pick that book up, but in a nutshell,

 

Does it support Rod and Coyote's comments, and completely negate all of my points?

 

If so, then I can just relax and move on.

[dayvel]

You can't hammer a cymbal after it's been tempered (brought to a high temperature and quenched). Tempering is what makes the cymbal hard (and brittle). Tempering is why you can't weld or braze a cracked cymbal as well; the heat will undo the tempering and ruin the cymbal.

[Allan Speers]

Interesting. I guess I'd beter read that book!

 

-But in the meantime, couldn't you re-hammer, and then RE-TEMPER the cymbal? -I mean, couldn't a manufacturer do this, assuming they wanted to fine-tune it and sell it for big bucks?

[Siberian]

I'm digging waaaaay back to a metallurgy class I took in college about ten years ago... so I'll try to remember this as best I can... I'd have to find an old text book to verify this... but this is the way I **think** I remember it.... Someone please verify if this is right... cuz I slept through that class

 

When you heat metal up and melt it, the atoms that make up that material become very active and move around in chaos. As the metal cools and hardens, the atoms slow down and eventually settle into a very structured lattice formation. If you were to slowly let it cool and harden naturally without disturbing it, the lattice sets up in such a way that the atoms can easily move past each other, thus, the metal would be more soft and malleable.

 

If you hammer it while it is still cooling however, what happens is you permanently disturb that lattice structure, thus making it difficult for the atoms to move around within the lattice, hence, the metal becomes harder, more brittle, and more difficult to bend. This process is called annealing.

 

Think about what happens when you take a metal coat hanger and bend it back and forth several times. Eventually it snaps in half. This is the same as annealing. By bending it you have disrupted the positioning of the atoms within the lattice structure around the area where the metal was bent. Repeated bending disturbs the lattice structure even further to the point where none of the atoms can move around any longer. At that point it has become so brittle that any further attempts to bend it will result in a break.

 

You'll also notice that if you touch your finger to the metal around the bend point, it has become very warm... almost hot. This is the result of the friction caused by the atoms rubbing violently against each other when you bent it.

 

Another way to harden the metal is to cool it very rapaidly. I mentioned a moment ago that as metal cools, the atoms settle back down into the lattice structure, but that structure takes time to set up. If you accellerate the cooling process, the atoms don't have enough time to form the lattice properly, and so essentially they are frozen in their chaotic state... similar to the chaotic state that annealing causes. This is done by heating the metal and immediately quenching it in a cold water bath. Hence, the process is known as "quenching".

 

Whenever you see on TV where a blacksmith is pulling a glowing red-hot metal object out of the fire, and then he takes it over to an anvil and starts hammering it, then he dips it in the water... what he is doing is hardening the metal, both by annealing and quenching.

 

I should also mention as a side note that the carbon content in metal also has a lot to do with how hard or soft it is, and how brittle it can become after further hardening takes place. If I recall, the higher the carbon content, the harder the metal because it's the displacement of the carbon atoms that actually causes the lattice structure to lock up. Hence, the less carbon in the metal.... the more malleable it is... like lead. Ever hear someone refer to a really hard metal as "High carbon steel"? It's the added carbon that helps make it harder. Don't quote me on that though... I could be on crack.

 

As far as how this all ties into cymbal hammering... I believe you have to hammer the cymbal while it is still cooling, otherwise it can become too brittle and crack. That said, in order to properly re-hammer a cymbal, it would probably have to be heated up really hot... probably to the point where it is almost melting, then cooled and re-hammered. At that point you would completely alter the sound characteristics of the original cymbal anyway, and it's probably not worth doing.

 

For cymbals, the hammering process effects the hardness as well as the sound. I don't recall if that Cymbal book goes into much detail about the metallurgy side of it, but it does talk about how the sound is effected by different hammering processes.

 

Anyway, if I am wrong on all of this, you can kick me in the nuts. But I'm pretty sure I am in the ballpark of being somewhat right. Like I said, it's been awhile since I took that class, and I really reaching into the memory banks to try and recall some things I'm not real sure I understood correctly in the first place.

[Dwarf]

Originally posted by Siberian:

I'm digging waaaaay back to a metallurgy class I took in college about ten years ago... so I'll try to remember this as best I can... I'd have to find an old text book to verify this... but this is the way I **think** I remember it.... Someone please verify if this is right... cuz I slept through that class

 

I don't know if you're right or wrong, but dammit you sound right. I believe you

 

--

Rob

[Allan Speers]

I agree. Siberian, your nuts are safe!

 

So now I see clearly why you can't re-hammer a cymbal.

 

HOWEVER, what about re-lathing? The lathing is done last, yes? So the metal is already hard. Extra lathing should certainly be possible.

 

Wouldn't it then be theoretically possible to change a cymbal's characteristics SOMEWHAT by carefully lathing various "rings" to different thicknesses? supose you have a killer heavy crash, but it (subjectively) rings much too long for recording purposes. certainly one could TRY to improve it by lathing it thinner all around? -Or thinning just a center ring, for a more complex sound. or...

 

Granted, the hammering is likely more important to the overall sound. However, who says you COULDN"T re-heat it and hammer some more, assuming you had the equipment. Take your blacksmith analogy: the smitty does indeed re-heat / re-hammer the sword many times over. the end result is no less strong as a result.

 

I think this could be a pretty cool way to make a living, if it actually worked. You gotta' admit, it's at least an intriguing idea.

[Siberian]

**sigh of relief** Whew, I guess I can take that cup off then.

 

Yea, I suppose you could lathe it and alter sound, provided the cymbal is a heavy thick one to begin with. Obviously you wouldn't want to attempt it on a thin crash.

 

I recall there used to be a company that specialized in refinishing cymbals. (maybe they're still around, I don't know for sure)... but you send your cymbals to them and they would basically make them look like factory new again. Part of the process involved buffing the cymbal with an electric buffer and an abrasive compound, essentially removing very small amounts of surface metal, and effectly making the cymbal thinner by maybe a thousandth of an inch or so. They did warn though, that the process could slightly alter the sound characteristics of the cymbal.

[Dwarf]

Allan, wouldn't it be easier to just buy a new cymbal? The cost to have the cymbal redone as a one off job would be exorbitant (if even possible) and there would be no guarantees that you'd get the sound you want. Probbaly better to keep the almost perfect one and try to find the "perfect" cymbal.

 

Fwiw, many of us have been searching for the "perfect cymbal" for years. Like the search for the Grail - it's a neverending search. And like Monty Python discovered, the French already have one, it's not the one you want Best to just keep looking.

 

--

Rob

[Siberian]

I totally agree about the "holy grail" comment. For me, searching for "the one" right cymbal is a crusade. I never could understand how people could just order a cymbal through the mail, without even hearing it first. They all sound so different... even within the same model and size. I always like to audition several cymbals until I find "the one".

 

The only one I could possibly see doing that with is maybe the Paiste Signature Series. Last I checked, they were pretty consistant from cymbal to cymbal. Not dead balls on... but close.