[Lost thread reply flood -- catching up. Long, but mostly due to multiple quotes at the end.] Some of this is factual, some possibly not, but marked as such. xST-x: (Assumed) Represents "studio", later became UST-x, as a result of U.S. (primary market) input into desired features in the institutional arena. ST-3 : (Assumed) This product began as ST-3. At least I cannot find references to any predecessors in the United States. ST-4: (Questionable) In spite of what Roger said, I've not seen the product, a warranty card, or fielded a question on an ST-4 or UST-4. Notice that there was a KG-1~3, <skip>, KG-5~8 in the earlier days? I once asked about the missing number in model designators, and was told that '4' was an unlucky number in Japan. I never pursued the matter, and the person I asked could simply have been trying to avoid any further discussion. It's apparent that later model designators got over any superstitions that existed. In any event, there were (and are) models of pianos that are not imported into the U.S. for various reasons -- the reasons primarily dealing with acceptance (even more ABS parts) or costs (prohibitive, creating limited market). So, it's possible Roger really does service (U)ST-4's in Canada. UST-5, 6, 7: Introduction of the 'U' prefix, with possible margin of error due to Roger's input. These were the culmination of suggestions made to improve the marketability of the product. Minor improvements were made (trapwork linkages, etc.), but I think it involved more case changes than improvements. Among these were making the finish less... well, ugly; softening the lines to eliminate the boxy look, and changing the music desk angle so music wouldn't fall off so easily. These models also feature both topboard and fallboard locks. Somewhere during this time, probably with the '5', ABS materials were incorporated in certain areas. This was an assigned risk decision and a mixed blessing in the earlier days. The decision later proved to be more of an asset than a liability. For a long time, these products shared the same back and action with the (then CE-8), a Euro-style unit. However, the UST-x represented a better dollar value where performance won out over case design. Simply put, these models were/are in competition for visibility and market share in schools, right along with Hamilton, Everett, Story & Clark, and many others. To be competitive in bids, the prices for these models were made artificially low, beginning at the factory, then [ideally] reflected through the entire sales chain. This merchandising plan obviously worked, as evidenced by the proliferation of the product in school districts. And, if one didn't object to an institutional piano in their home, they could easily take advantage of the same pricing strategy. Gee, I hope I haven't betrayed any confidences with this information(!) Observations: 1. UST-x and equivalent Euro back assemblies exhibit a characteristic "over-ring" after a fist full of chord is played and quickly released. This is similar to older uprights where there is far more string than there is damper to stop the string. Whether this is a design flaw is questionable, but it is a byproduct of the design and fortunately, has never been high on the complaint list. 2. Due to the 'shared' design of the pedals and trapwork, pedal resistance is compounded, and some individuals object to this. The fix is to replace the damper pedal spring with one from a Kawai grand. The reverse is also true, by the way, if someone wants a stiffer pedal on a grand. 3. David (Porritt). Sorry, no prize on the SC-3 versus UST-8 comparison. Many years, many models apart. And with that... UST-8: Mannino can take it from here. I hope this reply was more informational than commercial in scope, since that was the intent. ================== Appropriate threads leading to my reply: ================== [Goodale] Could anyone tell me when the Kawai UST-5 went out of production? [Harvey] Ah, that would have been about the time the UST-6 was introduced. 8-} Seriously, I believe the '5' series would have been coming to an end =prior= to 1980. That's as close as I can come without emperical evidence (paperwork). [Goodale, apparently not liking that response, waited for and responded to...] [Mannino] Well, I don't have any records of when pianos went in and out of production either, but I think Jim Harvey is about right - somewhere around 1978 seems right. [Goodale] I was wondering because there are several here at the university. Having worked for a Kawai dealer for some time I have worked on just about every model there ever was. The one model I have never seen, however, is the UST-5. I found it interesting climbing into these things and observing the obvious major improvements that have evolved in later models such as the UST-8. The UST-5s that we have here were all purchased between 1969-1971. Would this have been the begining of production on these? What came before the UST-5, was there a UST-4? [Mannino] This series started (I believe) with the ST-3. I have never heard of a UST-4, but the UST-5 was a widely respected workhourse studio. It was changed to the UST-6 at some point, then on to the UST-7, which is still being made and is still a very sturdy piano. The UST-8 is the same scale and action in a lower cost form - simpler cabinet, slightly thinner back structure. [Goodale] Thanks for the info. I never heard of a UST-3, were there a lot of those imported here? I have always been real thrilled with the UST-8s. They are great institutional pianos, rugged and easy to tune and regulate. Great for the hard use and abuse that practice room pianos face. I would really like to see a dozen or so new ones here. [Zabrocki, from out of nowhere, responding to age relativity?] I service four UST-5 models in an LDS Church which were purchased new in 1974. [Jolly] In the early 70's here in Canada we sold many UST4's. Back in the those days Japanese pianos were 50% less than good quality North American products, however both Japanese companies had not mastered the dry climate manufacturing techniques that we see today. Steam heated institutions played heck with stability. Many were repinned. These units seemed to fair very well in home use, where the humidity is on average 30% in winter, vs institutional use at 10%. Brings back some fond memories of a by gone era. [Porritt] Was the UST-8 the replacement for the SC-3? The public school district here has about 15 SC-3s and they are quite light duty machines. Actually an unfortunate choice for a school district. The dealer was trying to be sure he got the bid. The UST-7 would have been a much more satisfactory instrument for this kind of institutional use. Jim Harvey, RPT harvey@greenwood.net
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC