On Tuesday, May 3, 2022 at 1:17:41 PM UTC-7, Néstor Castiglione wrote:
> On Monday, May 2, 2022 at 4:35:25 AM UTC-7,
dan....@gmail.com wrote:
> >
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6ZTm4r4pNM
>
> It's funny that the host says Steinways have a "darker tone" in the upper range.
> I've always felt they sounded shrill and chalk-white. I used to think Steinways
> were good for a lot of 20th-century repertoire that needed clear definition of
> rhythms and intricate polyphonic textures, but no longer believe this to be
> the case. Their sound to me, overall, is strident, even metallic.
It is extremely difficult to generalize about Stoneways. There are so many of
them all over the world, manfuctured over more than a century, maintained
(or not) God knows how, etc... By and large, I agree with you however: they
tend towards a metallic sound. They also tend to sound differently from
top to bottom, producing different timbres in the bass, medium and treble
registers. In the right (wrong?) hands this can be used to create a three
hand imprssion -- e.g. by VH.
From a different angle, I do not like Stoneway actions since they started to
use Renner howitzers. They are heavy and non-linear, like the steering on
newer Audis ;-)
> For me, the other three Bs (Blüthner, Baldwin, and Bösendorfer) are
> superior.
Why only 3? Bechstein no longer matters? ;-)
I have always preferred the B sound to the S sound. Rounder, mellower,
richer, warmer. Unfortunately, the Bs are not viable choices for concert
pianists (except perhaps Bosies) because of limited availability and
shortage of technicians. Many Baldwins have gorgeous sound but
are let down by their actions. I've seen quite a few refitted with
Yamaha actions. Jazz pianists seem to like them.
Last but not least, Yamaha CFS/ CFX are also great instruments.
dk