First, some clarification. You would not find an Olmec settlement in the Yucatan. The Olmec were largely centered on Veracruz where their settlements of La Venta, Tres Zapotes, and San Lorenzo are located. While the Olmec may have had some artistic influence on other regions in Mesoamerica such as Puebla and Guerrero, one has to keep in mind that there is agency involved when it comes to art. People make a choice to adopt technology or artistic styles from others for their own reasons. For example, the Mokaya people in Tabasco adopted ceramic technology from the south as it made its way north from South America (Clark and Blake 1994). While the Mokaya may have adopted ceramic techniques and methods of production, they rejected the ceramic styles from the south. Instead, they appear to have continued to use their decorative techniques from gourd vessels onto the new ceramic vessels because of the ideological and social meanings already in place. The artistic styles of ceramics from the south had little to no meaning among the Mokaya and thus little to no use.
Second, the Maya in the Yucatan and Guatemala have deep roots in the region that extend into the Preclassic/Formative Period with their own artistic traditions. As a result they are not Olmec or descended from Olmec, though they may have adopted some Olmec iconography for their own purposes. The best examples of those deeper artistic roots can be found at the Late Preclassic sites of El Mirador (Hansen 2001) and San Bartolo. El Mirador is perhaps one of the largest Maya cities from any period with some of the most monumental constructions, yet its art is distinct from the earlier Early and Middle Formative Olmec periods. A comparison between the Olmec colossal heads and the giant stucco masks at El Mirador highlight vast differences in facial features and decorative elements. San Bartolo further differentiates Maya art from Olmec art in its well preserved and breathtaking murals that have survived the jungle heat and humidity for two millennia. No known Olmec murals have survived, but what remains are the sculpture and ceramic figures and vessels in which we can compare. And the comparison between Olmec art (Taube 2004) and San Bartolo's murals (Saturno et al 2005) reveals some similarities, but not necessarily a direct transmission. It may be more of an awareness of earlier artistic conventions the way the Aztec were aware of earlier artistic conventions for Teotihuacan and Tula.
If we are comparing the Maya from the Middle Preclassic to the Maya of the Postclassic, there are two notable changes in technology I think. The first would be the introduction of masonry for the construction of architecture. At Ceibal in Guatemala, Takeshi Inomata and his colleagues (2015) have uncovered Middle Preclassic monumental construction in the form of large earthen platforms. At this time, it appears that the area in and around Ceibal was occupied by both farmers and hunter-gatherers. However, because of the size of the earthen platform, Inomata believes that both groups came together to help construct the earthen platforms. That would mean that both groups considered the earthen platforms ideologically and possibly socio-politically important enough to construct despite the logistic requirements to acquire and transport so much earth. By the Late Preclassic and onward we see the introduction of stone built structures with masonry being used in a number of places including El Mirador. The later Classic period Puuc sites like Sayil and Postclassic sites of Chichen Itza and Uxmal are perhaps the more famous masonry constructed Maya sites in the area.
The other notable difference in technology is the introduction and adoption of metallurgy from West Mexico. We have a section on Metallurgy in the FAQ that covers the topic as a whole. I want to take this opportunity, however, to discuss an idea regarding metallurgy that Kaul Taube discussed at a talk at the Denver Art Museum. Taube likes to acquire and carve jadeite from Guatemala in his spare time. He often recreates famous Maya jadeite objects. One of the things he has recreated are the jadeite celts that Maya kings would wear around their waist on a belt. These celts, which came in groups of three, would create a ringing sound when they would hit against one another. And this ringing sound would have been produced whenever the king walked. Taube noticed that after the introduction of metallurgy to the Maya, the laboriously crafted jadeite celts disappeared from depictions of kings. In their places were metal bells made of copper. Not only were these bells easier to import from elsewhere, unlike the jadeite hidden in the valleys of Guatemala’s mountains, but they were easier to repair and fix. Unlike a jadeite celt, if a bell was broken or crumpled it could be melted down and recast. If a jadeite celt were to break it would be rendered useless since it would no longer produce the same sort of ringing noise as it once did.
There are perhaps other minor technological changes, but I think these two are perhaps the most notable differences.
Clark, John E., and Michael Blake. "The power of prestige: Competitive generosity and the emergence of rank societies in lowland Mesoamerica." Factional competition and political development in the New World (1994): 17-30.
Hansen, Richard D. "The first cities: The beginnings of urbanization and state formation in the Maya Lowlands." Maya: divine kings of the rainforest (2001): 50-65.
Inomata, Takeshi, et al. "Development of sedentary communities in the Maya lowlands: Coexisting mobile groups and public ceremonies at Ceibal, Guatemala." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112.14 (2015): 4268-4273.
Saturno, William A., et al. The Murals of San Bartolo, El Petén, Guatemala: Part I: the North Wall. Barnardsville, NC: Center for Ancient American Studies, 2005.
Taube, Karl A. Olmec Art at Dumbarton Oaks. No. 2. Dumbarton Oaks, 2004.
