<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" = http-equiv=Content-Type> <META content="MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=GENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY> <DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=450341204-06042000>Richard,</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=450341204-06042000></SPAN></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN = class=450341204-06042000>First - I should apologize to the list for not signing my original post with a = signature other than my "Institute" tag line.  Any opinion that I = state in a message such as that one or this one is strictly my own and not that = of the Institute or the PTG.  (I wouldn't pretend to speak for an entire oranization.)</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=450341204-06042000></SPAN></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN = class=450341204-06042000>Second - My point was not to categorize piano brands but rather that = categorizing by brand is extremely difficult to do.  Many brands have varying = quality in the line while each individual piano differs.  The message I was = trying to send is that the work done by the technician both on the dealer floor = and after the piano is in its new home is far more important than any brand, = reputation or opinion.  I certainly don't lump all pianos into one category but = merely wanted to point out that there are a lot of pianos out there.  In = my experience, I've seen both good and bad pianos with the same name on the = front.  Therefore, I would tend to reserve judgement on a brand and = prefer to see the individual instrument.</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=450341204-06042000></SPAN></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN = class=450341204-06042000>The other problem we encounter is that we tend to often base our opinions on = the instruments we've seen.  This might lead us to form an opinion = based on too small a sample to be representative or on isntruments that don't reflect = the current product from a company (for better or worse.)  = </SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=450341204-06042000></SPAN></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN = class=450341204-06042000>Okay, there's my late night musing (after tuning way too many pianos today) = and I hope it's at least a little intelligible.</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=450341204-06042000></SPAN></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN = class=450341204-06042000>I know I certainly won't be recommending that Lester spinet that was on my list = to tune today. <grin></SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=450341204-06042000></SPAN></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=450341204-06042000>Allan</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN = class=450341204-06042000>Allan L. Gilreath, RPT</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=450341204-06042000>Gilreath Piano & Organ = Co.</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=450341204-06042000>Calhoun, GA - USA</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <DIV align=left class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr><FONT = face=Tahoma size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> = owner-pianotech@ptg.org [mailto:owner-pianotech@ptg.org]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Richard Brekne<BR><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, April 04, 2000 4:50 AM<BR><B>To:</B> PTG<BR><B>Subject:</B> Quality in Pianos<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>List <P>Ok.. the recent two threads on advice about buying a piano has left = me a big paffed about the seeming equality in how many techs range pianos = in terms of quality, sound, and durability. <P>I personally operate with 4 "classes" of pianos. I arrive at this = from an admitedly somewhat subjective evaluation process, yet I strive to = include as much objectivity as my humanity allows for. Evaluation of sound is of course  tough, at least above a certain level of quality. Things = like tuning stability and action quality are much easier to observe, as is = basic construction. How a piano holds up over time (both with and without = proper sevice) is also something rather easy to observe over time. <P>In that light I find that I would place three pianos without any = further consideration in the top class. Both Steinways, and the Bosendorfer. I = would be tempted to place Bechstein in this class as well, but something = holds me back just a bit. <P>The second class I place pianos like Bechstein, Yamaha, Bluther, = Boston, Grotrian, Sauter, Schimmel, Seiler, Baldwins and a few others. Pretty = much in that order as well. These are all good pianos, well made in most = regards and will hold up well over time. But all lack something or another (some = more then others) to allow me to put them in the same class as the three = mentioned above. The Bechstein, Yamaha and Bluthner come closest tho.. = especially the Bechstein. <P>In the third class, which is where I personally draw the line for = minimal quality that should be allowed, I place pianos like Samick, Young = Chang, Petrof, August Forster, some of the cheaper Yamahas and Kawaiis (I see = some CX5's over here) and  several others. Typical for all of these = are that they have lots of assorted problems that irritate the patooties out of = me. They all have their ways of cutting corners or choosing where to do = shoddy work and they all have their strengths. Petrof is perhaps my favorite = amoung these because of a rather pleasing general sound picture, and because = of the fact that one can really accomplish alot by ripping apart the action = and putting it back together. (Almost any competent tech can make a bit improvement on Petrofs by doing this) I dont like the bass strings on = Petrofs, but those can be changed. Worse is all the false beats in the treble = and the all to often lousey pinblock work found in these instruments. Samicks = are also a piano I recomend often in this class. Pretty solid, really clean = sound, nice scale and good bass strings. Pretty stable. In fact I would be tempted = to place them lowest in class two had it not been for an observation = about what happens to these over time. I find time and time again 12 - 15 year = old Samicks that have just gone dead sound wise. I am not sure why this = happens as it probably has to do with soundboard concerns that are outside my = scope of knowledge. They just develop this "thuddy" quality over the whole = piano. Not all of them mind you.. just enough of them that I cant get myself to = range them better then class 3. <P>Then there are the non piano pianos. Class 4 I do not recommend to = anyone, advise against, and personally would like to see forbidden. These are = pianos that come out of the factory with so many serious flaws that I cant = for the life of me understand how anyone who knows anything about pianos can = in good concious accept them as viable instruments in any sense of the word. = These are pianos that come with really loose tuning pins, actions that are = falling apart, soundboards that crack and pull away from ribs and rims before = they get to the store, pinblocks that delaminate or have horrible workmanship = with regard to installation, etc., etc., etc., ad absurdum. You know the = lot and I wont mention any of them. These kinds of "pianos" are clearly = substandard and represent pretty blatant fraud to my mind of thinking. <P>I would be interested in hearing how other techs roughly classify = pianos. I was, mildly said, supprised to see the assistant director of the PTG = annual convention seemingly throw Steinways and Young Changs in the same = "box" as being... "acceptable". <P>    "<I>All of the brands that have been mentioned = are quite</I> <BR><I>    reputable as are such names as = Seiler, Schimmel, Baldwin, Young Chang, etc."</I><I></I> <P>I am reasonably sure he didnt mean to say the Young Chang is just = as fine an instrument as Steinway, tho it could easily be misread to that affect.<I></I> <P>-- <BR>Richard Brekne <BR>Associate PTG, N.P.T.F. <BR>Bergen, = Norway <BR>  </P></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>