<html>
<head>
<title></title>
</head>
<body style="word-wrap: break-word; -khtml-nbsp-mode: space; -khtml-line-break: after-white-space">
<p>Good for you Jeff...</p>
<p>What a lot of complain about is failure of Steinway to address the glaring problems we all see. Still, they sell all their pianos. At the CA. State PTG Convention, Bob M. from Pianotek mentioned that Hamburg Steinway puts their action totally together and then fit it to the piano, ala strike point. Then they adjust the case parts to fit the action....what a concept...quite a difference from New York...</p>
<p>On another issue...I'm really upset with the closing of the Yamaha Georgia factory. More American jobs going to China. I have a mind to quit recommending Yamaha...</p>
<p>David Ilvedson, RPT<br />Pacifica, CA 94044<br /><br /></p>
<div style="padding-right: 5px; padding-left: 5px; padding-bottom: 5px; border-left: #000000 3px solid; padding-top: 5px">
<hr />Original message<br />From: "Jeff Tanner"
<jtanner@mozart.sc.edu> </jtanner@mozart.sc.edu><br />To: "College and University Technicians"
<caut@ptg.org> </caut@ptg.org><br />Received: 2/13/2007 2:06:14 PM<br />Subject: Re: [CAUT] New Upright Pianos<br /><br /><br />
<div>
<div>On Feb 10, 2007, at 9:30 AM, Barbara Richmond wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline" />
<blockquote type="cite">
<div style="margin: 0px">Greetings all:</div>
<div style="min-height: 14px; margin: 0px"><br /></div>
<div style="margin: 0px">While we're on the subject, a friend asked me to compare Yamaha U-3s with Steinway URs.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>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!).</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br class="khtml-block-placeholder" /></div>
<div>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.</div>
<div><br class="khtml-block-placeholder" /></div>
<div>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.</div>
<div><br class="khtml-block-placeholder" /></div><br />
<blockquote type="cite">
<div style="margin: 0px"><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>The argument against the Yamahas (given by the Steinway dealer) is the Steinways will last a lot longer. <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>These pianos would be used in a university, but I'm not sure if they are for practice rooms or studios.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>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...</div>
</blockquote>
</div><br />
<div><br class="khtml-block-placeholder" /></div>
<div>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.</div>
<div><br class="khtml-block-placeholder" /></div>
<div>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. </div>
<div><br class="khtml-block-placeholder" /></div>
<div>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.</div>
<div><br class="khtml-block-placeholder" /></div>
<div>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.</div>
<div><br class="khtml-block-placeholder" /></div>
<div>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.</div>
<div><br class="khtml-block-placeholder" /></div>
<div>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.</div>
<div><br class="khtml-block-placeholder" /></div>
<div>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.</div>
<div><br class="khtml-block-placeholder" /></div>
<div><br class="khtml-block-placeholder" /></div><br /><br />
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="word-spacing: 0px; font: 12px Helvetica; text-transform: none; color: rgb(0,0,0); text-indent: 0px; white-space: normal; letter-spacing: normal; border-collapse: separate; border-spacing: 0px 0px; -khtml-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -apple-text-size-adjust: auto; orphans: 2; widows: 2">
<div>Jeff Tanner, RPT</div>
<div>University of South Carolina</div>
<div><br class="khtml-block-placeholder" /></div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline" /></span>
</div><br />
</div>
</body>
</html>