[CAUT] New Upright Pianos

[Paul Chick (Earthlink)]

Subject: Re: [CAUT] New Upright Pianos

 

 

On Feb 10, 2007, at 9:30 AM, Barbara Richmond wrote:





Greetings all:

 

While we're on the subject, a friend asked me to compare Yamaha U-3s with
Steinway URs. Uh, I don't even know what a Steinway UR is, just that I
usually try to avoid Steinway uprights in general (but maybe they've
improved lately!).

 

I cut my teeth on Steinway 45s (or 1098s or whatever they are). Once you
learn how to work with them, or at least accept them, they're much easier to
appreciate. But avoiding them simply because you'd rather tune a Yamaha
because it's easier isn't giving the Steinway much of a chance out of the
starting gate. And don't expect it to be like tuning a Yamaha or a Kawai, or
a Boston or a Walter, or a Baldwin, because any of those, it isn't. You have
to accept the instrument for what it is and work with it. Yes. Steinway
verticals can be aggravating to tune. Some, more so than others, and
especially when they're new. But once you put that front board back on, take
off your technician's hat and put on your musician's hat, it is a much
different story. All that noise somehow turns into a reliable, very stable,
and pretty decent sounding musical instrument.

 

And I'm sorry, what David Porritt wrote, quoting Ron N, is just completely
off base. The people who own 1098s love them. It doesn't matter why. They
just do. And those people tend to find Yamaha verticals leave much to be
desired. I especially don't get the big hoopla over the U3. It is very
creamy. In fact, all cream. No coffee. No tea. No peaches. No cookies.
Just... ...plain... ...cream.

 





The argument against the Yamahas (given by the Steinway dealer) is the
Steinways will last a lot longer. These pianos would be used in a
university, but I'm not sure if they are for practice rooms or studios.
Anyway, I think it's hard to beat Yamaha in consistency and I wonder (and
what I would be concerned about is) what the condition the Steinway hammers
are in regarding lacquering--and then there are those center pin bushings...

 

 

I can't in good conscience responsibly agree with much of anything that has
been said on this thread. When I look at the P2s and P202s in my client base
and compare them to the 1098/45s from the same time and even years older,
there is no way I could ever come to a sober conclusion that the Steinway
doesn't hold up better over time than the Yamaha. The same would have to be
said for G1's, G2s, G3s, and C3's versus Steinway S, M and L, even with
teflon. Sure, the atoms will all still be there years from now on both
pianos, but give me a practice room beaten 40 year old 1098 over a P2 that's
been used a couple hours a week in a church any day.

 

Folks, we're talking about mass produced pianos built for the lower priced
market by a company accustomed to its customers throwing pianos away after
25 or 30 years, versus artist grade instruments built with superior
materials, and built to be rebuilt again and again by a company that has
been building pianos for world class artists since 1854. 

 

Steinway marketing myth my behind. I don't see people lining up to pay 5
times the original selling price for 35-40 (or 80 to 100) year old Yamaha
pianos and then investing more money to get us to rebuild them. And I
definitely don't see how that can be blamed on Steinway's marketing
department. Yamaha's main market niche is for disposable pianos, and they
are priced accordingly.

 

I have nothing against the Yamaha product or the company. But we're not
talking about apples and apples here. If we were talking about Yamaha's
artist series instruments, you might have a good debate. But Yamaha has shot
itself in the foot for not marketing them more diligently. Or perhaps it
can't sell them. For Yamaha to make a piano in Steinway's quality range,
they have to charge 30%-40% more. Unless, of course, you're looking at a
used one.

 

You've actually got to hand it to Steinway. The Steinway factory is located
in one of the most expensive cities in the world, with one of the highest
costs of living anywhere. And despite labor unions, and difficult hazardous
materials restrictions, they manage to build a world class piano which sells
for a lower cost than any of the Asians can do it. And it has survived the
American economy for over 150 years. That is no easy feat considering it
survived a civil war, two world wars and a dozen or more year long economic
depression that wiped out almost every American piano manufacturer. I'm
tired of hearing them berated the way they are.

 

Our customers like Steinway. Performing artists like Steinway. Our
university faculties prefer Steinway. Steinway doesn't have to loan their
pianos for free for a year to get universities to use them, and they don't
have to pay artists for endorsements. This is not Steinway marketing.

 

I really don't see how anyone could come to any different conclusion, unless
that someone truly can't appreciate the difference. Then, I suppose, it
doesn't matter.

 

Jeff Tanner, RPT

University of South Carolina

 

Thanks for your comments, Jeff.  I tune and tech for a local dealer that
carries Steinway, a line of nice Japanese pianos, and a price point Chinese
product.  2%-the Steinway inventory-creates as much attention as the 98%.
The attention is not the advertising, prep work, etc.  It is the awe of the
consumer walking into the store and up to a world class instrument whose
name does not include "piano."   Just say "Steinway" to anyone in music.
They know it's a piano.  

 

Paul C

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/caut.php/attachments/20070213/6c206e39/attachment.html