<HTML> <HEAD> <TITLE>Re: [CAUT] comparison</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY> You’re right! My bad! (I’ve had my coffee now.  I’ll be OK the rest of the day.) They’re both nice pianos in their own right, and I wouldn’t turn either one of them down as a gift.  But still, the RX2 is in the 5’7” neighborhood.  If the C5 isn’t worn out, bigger is better. Ken Z. On 1/17/07 9:03 AM, "Porritt, David" <dporritt@mail.smu.edu> wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE>Ken, the C5 is only 6’5” I think.     dp   David M. Porritt dporritt@smu.edu <HR ALIGN=CENTER SIZE="2" WIDTH="100%"> From: caut-bounces@ptg.org [<a href="mailto:caut-bounces@ptg.org]">mailto:caut-bounces@ptg.org]</a> On Behalf Of Ken Zahringer Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 8:39 AM To: College and University Technicians Subject: Re: [CAUT] comparison The RX2 is a nice little piano; I’ve worked on several of them for the Mormons around here.  BUT - a 7-foot Yamaha for about the same price?  And only 17 years old?  Go for the big one! Regards, Ken Z. On 1/16/07 8:31 PM, "David Ilvedson" <ilvey@sbcglobal.net> wrote: List, I have a customer looking at a 1990 Yamaha C5 (apparently little used..I will inspect) and a new RX2.  For about the same price.  Any input on your preference? David Ilvedson, RPT Pacifica, CA 94044 </BLOCKQUOTE> -- Ken Zahringer, RPT Piano Technician MU School of Music 297 Fine Arts 882-1202 cell 489-7529 </BODY> </HTML>