[CAUT] New Upright Pianos

[Rick Florence]

on 2/10/07 7:06 PM, Barbara Richmond at piano57 at insightbb.com wrote:
 
> Back to the business at hand.  I was really wondering about the "last
> longer" claim.  Has anyone heard of or experienced this?   Is this a
> comparison of the structural integrity of each brand?  Would the "last
> longer" claim be related to the fact that Steinway <grand> pianos are
> worth rebuilding?   Would this necessarily translate to the uprights?

This claim of longevity, I believe, is one of the great marketing
successes/myths of the piano industry.  You got to hand it to Steinway, they
are brilliant marketers.  Pardon me if this becomes a little to much of a
diatribe, but in this case, I think, "the Emperor has no clothes."

I have seen absolutely NO evidence of a Steinway grand or upright lasting
longer than any another well-built piano.  I'll concede a point on the
rim/frame holding up extremely well over the years, but I don't see this
longevity in any other part of the piano.

Soundboards crack just as readily, and sometimes more so with the problems
caused by the compression crown method they use.

Bridge caps are not any less susceptible to splitting.  Our latest purchase
of grands (1996), we are already beginning to deal with bridge cap
replacement, partly because of poor notching, as well poor wood grain
selection.

Strings break as fast as any other brand I've seen.  More so with a few S
models that have too long of a speaking length in the high treble.

The balance rail bearings seem to lead to premature pulley keys.

Actions, even when they are set up properly (key ratios correct), don't last
nearly as long as a Renner or Yamaha action, both in terms of hammer wear,
action felt, and center pin issues.

That black stuff they call lacquer starts wearing through on the edges
almost immediately.  The fallboards will be worn to the wood within a few
years.

Don't read this wrong, I love a good Steinway grand (can't think of an
upright from their collection I like), I just won't buy one for the bogus
claim of longevity, and I prepare myself for reality of the extra work
involved of owning one.  I also love other piano makes and the different
colors of music attainable through them.  Long live artistic variety!

I think too many people confuse "last longer" with "worth rebuilding."  It
is worth rebuilding a Steinway piano because it is so expensive to replace
it.  An added benefit is the ability to use after-market materials and other
methods of rebuilding that will last longer, and perform better, than the
original.

If you choose to purchase a different quality piano that cost sometimes half
the price of a Steinway, you may not choose to rebuild it when the time
comes, because you can replace it for almost the same cost - this doesn't
mean it didn't last an long.  There are two advantages to this: 1. you
actually have money to replace, because you have not blown it all on the
original purchase, 2.  Valuable time is not used up in the the rebuilding
process.

I think this is the ONLY way to go with uprights.  Case in point:  We have a
large number of Yamaha U1 uprights ranging from 30 to 10 years old.  We are
in the process of attempting to replace the older ones now (I would prefer
to do it when they are 20 years old), still, they are functional pianos.
Our 15 year old U1s have been in practice rooms from day one (we usually
don't do this, but it was needed at the time).  These pianos have had keys
rebushed once and hammers filed twice.  The actions are remarkably stable
and perform flawlessly.  The polyester finishes still look good after an
hour or so of yearly cleaning and polishing.  I don't like the music desks,
but they can perform better with a long hinge attached.  They are also a
little unstable in the lower tenor area, but they tune up so fast, it's not
that big of a deal.  Given their work-horse service in every other way, they
are a keeper.  We have tried, Kawai, Baldwin & Charles Walter - none have
performed as well.  We have never tried 1098s as they are too expensive, and
I have seen the above mentioned problems at other schools I have visited
(along with that "tuning problem").  The Boston and Essex are just a
glorified Kawai and Pearl River.  I don't see them performing better or
lasting longer than their factory bothers and sisters.

We are using some Schimmel 120 and 130 and Petrof 118 and 125 models in our
loan program (30 pianos loaned of our 174 in use).  I'm not sure about the
Petrofs yet, but the Schimmels look to be a great piano as well for
institutional use.  They are pricey, but the local dealer is very supportive
(School of Music Alum) and gives us great prices - similar to the U1 - so we
may buy a few in the future.

My advice...tell the Emperor to put some clothes on and get the Yamahas -
they are a proven institutional upright piano.


_____________
Rick Florence
Senior Piano Technician
Arizona State University, School of Music