A new C6, and survey of Yamaha Grands
Eting
A hypertext version of this document should appear shortly at
http://www.scopereviews.com/piano.html I may add to it from time to time if
there is interest.
I am a classical pianist of modest (some would say VERY modest!)
accomplishment. I recently sold my 1986 Yamaha G2R (5' 7") and replaced it
with a new Yamaha C6 (6' 11"). In the process, I played on dozens of
instruments over a period of about 6 months. As a result, I wound up playing
on most of the more popular grand pianos in the 5' - 7' range. I became
especially familiar with the Yamahas. Hopefully my experiences can benefit
others in some way.
My test pieces are as follows:
Chopin:
Nocturne op. 9 #1, Bb minor
Nocturne op. 27 #2, Db major
Nocturne (posthumous) op. 72 #1, E Minor
Beethoven:
Sonata op. 27 #2 "Moonlight," 1st movement
From the above list you can see that I am not an expert or professional
pianist, nor am I exactly endowed with blazing technique. Readers (especially
those of more advanced ability than mine) should keep this in mind when reading
these impressions. In the process of shopping, however, I wound up playing all
four of these pieces on almost all of the pianos listed below and became
somewhat proficient at judging them.
Prices given are "list" which is pretty much meaningless in most cases --
expect a discount of 30% or more, especially on the Yamahas. The prices also
reflect the standard "Ebony" (Satin) finish.
________________________________________
Yamaha A1 (4' 11", about $8000 street)
This cute little grand drifts in an out of the Yamaha lineup. Recently, it has
just been reintroduced again. At first it looks like a joke, but in reality it
is not bad for such a tiny instrument. When I sat down to play it I gritted my
teeth, preparing for the worst, but after a few minutes I thought to myself,
"Hey, this isn't half-bad."
The A1 has a thin, tinny, bright sound, but at least it's even throughout the
whole range and the action is quite responsive. I'm not sure I'd recommend one
of these, but they are an example of what can be done with such a small
instrument given careful engineering. I actually like this piano better than
the GH1B.
Yamaha GH1B/GP1 (5' 3", $11,990-$13,290)
The GH1B (and its cheaper-cabinet brother, the GP1) are the price point grands
in the Yamaha lineup. The less said about these, the better. The tone is hard
and unforgiving. Technicians tell me that they almost never stay in tune for
long (one tech referred to GH1Bs as "picture frame" grands due to their popular
use, with the lid closed and a lacy cloth on top, as supports for framed
pictures of the owner's family, usually children or grandchildren.)
The GH1B has no duplex scaling, no tone collector, no soft-close keyboard, no
lid or fallboard locks, and the center pedal is the useless bass-sustain type.
Older versions (GH1) are even worse.
Yamaha C1 (5' 3", $16,790 list)
A rescaled G1, these C1 pianos are very well made and play rather nicely for
such a small grand. Not bad - I expected worse. Also, they are much better
than the GH1B/GP1s.
Yamaha C2 (5' 8", $19,090 list)
This piano was of some interest to me, as its lineage can be traced back to my
1986 G2R. The G2R was one of the last of the 5' 7" G2 pianos. The piano was
upgraded to the G2F (5' 8") and then changed to the C2 in 1995 when most of the
G series grands were dropped.
C2 grands are warmer and mellower than the G2 units. However, with careful
voicing, even some of the older G2s that have developed the trademark harsh and
brittle sound with age can be made to sound quite nice (I know; I had it done
on mine.)
I liked the tone and touch on the C2s I tried, although the bass is just a tad
thin sounding below the bass bridge break. Intelligent scale design largely
covers up for this, however. The C2 shares the same action assembly as the C3.
Yamaha C3 (6' 1", $26,190 list)
Although it is only 5" longer than the C2, the C3 is in another class
altogether. It is a huge leap in performance above the C2. The 6' 1" frame is
starting to give you a taste of that "real bass" feeling that you find in
larger grands. I've played many of these and have always been impressed with
the tone. If I wasn't so greedy, I might happily live with one of these pianos
for years.
The C3 co-existed with the G3 (6', discontinued) for a few years. These G3s
were nice but not quite to the level of the C3.
Yamaha C5 (6' 7", $28,290 list)
Caught in the no-man's land between the 6-foot and 7-foot range, the C5 isn't
as big an improvement over the C3 as I expected, despite the 6 inches and the
extra design freedom the longer length offers. The biggest improvement is (no
surprise) in the bass region, with more of that "big piano" feel to it. This
is due, it is said, largely to the direct bass bridge on these larger grands
(the C5 and up.)
However, playing the C3 and C5 side by side in the Chopin Nocturnes, I found I
could barely tell the difference unless I listened hard, or played loudly on
the bass notes. This is not an indictment of the C5; the C3s are just plain
that good.
The C5 is the last of the small and medium sized Yamaha grands. Although at 6'
7" it is getting up there in size, it still has the look and feel of a mid-size
grand. The C5 is the last piano with bass break at Bb 26, and the last one
with the 40" height and the 59" width (the larger grands have heftier frame
structures to support the increased weight.)
Yamaha grands are known for their nearly perfect quality control, but I did
play on one "flaky" instrument at a dealer. The voicing was all wrong, harsh
and strident, as if it had been sitting, uplayed, atop a heating duct for 10
years or so. However, other C5s I've played are simply wonderful.
Despite these lukewarm-sounding comments on the C5, I almost bought one,
especially when I saw the breathtaking cost of the C6 I was planning to order.
In retrospect, I don't think I would have been much worse off with the C5, at
least in my room. Older versions are 6' 6". Also, do not confuse the C5 with
the older G5, which, although nice, has an inferior scale design and isn't
quite as desirable. The C5 doesn't share action assemblies with any of the
other models. Its keys are longer than the C2/C3 pianos, but shorter than the
C6/C7 units.
Yamaha C6 (6' 11", $31,390 list)
After much hand-wringing, this is the piano I bought.
Anyone who thinks that a 4-inch difference can't amount to much should play a
C5 and a C6 side by side. The C6 is good leap in performance over the C5.
Subjectively, the C6 looks and feels positively huge next to the C5, already a
large instrument in its own right. Bass notes have that nice, tight slam to
them, and the rest of the scale is impressively even and smooth. The tone is
rich and pleasing. About the only thing I don't care for is a slight
wooden-like quality to the lower treble, which I plan to get voiced down.
I played many C5 and C6 pianos in showrooms before making a purchasing
decision. These are wonderful pianos, but still have a bit of that bright
sound that one associates with a Yamaha. They also play much louder than
comparable units from Kawai (the RX-6) or Schimmel (the CC208) and even the
Steinway B (a gorgeous piano.)
When I started out shopping for a new piano, I had "decided" beforehand to get
the 6' 10" Schimmel, based largely on the enthusiastic comments in Larry Fine's
book. While I found that I liked the Schimmel, the Yamaha wasn't far behind.
In fact, in certain ways,
the C6 was actually a little better, and better in typically "Japanese" ways --
the QC was tighter, and the pianos are more consistent. In the end, I was
willing to give up a little in tone quality (something many German pianos
possess) for this consistency and tightness of the QC.
The C6 is a relatively new model. It shares the action assembly with the C7
(the action on mine is actually stamped "C7.")
Yamaha C7 (7' 6", $35,790 list)
The C7 is 7 inches longer than a C6 and represents another healthy leap in
performance. As a concert hall-class grand, it's too big and too expensive for
most homes and budgets (at least mine!)
They are a blast to play, however, for those of us who are used to smaller
grands. At the climax to the op. 27 #2 Nocturne, I felt an enormous rush as I
tapped into a seemingly endless reserve of power on this piano. I kept
thinking of Tim "The Tool Man" Taylor ("More Power, Argh, Argh!") when I
pounded on the deepest bass notes.
Early versions are 7' 4" and have designations like C7D and C7E. There is some
debate as to the merits of these older C7s. Many technicians and pianists
don't like them. I did play on a couple of these 7' 4" C7 units and found the
tone pleasing. They seem warmer
and more diffuse-sounding than the new 7' 6" models. I liked the ones I tried.
7' 4" C7s are currently a great bargain in the large grand arena. I've seen
pristine 15-20 year old samples for sale in the $14K-$17K range. They're worth
checking out if you must have a large piano. You can recognize these older C7
grands by the large wooden brace inside the piano's lid (new C7s don't have the
brace.)
I've never played on a CFIII.
____________________________________
And the rest...
Although I wound up playing mostly Yamahas, I did have a chance to play a
number of other instruments from other manufacturers. Here are some of the
more interesting ones.
Bechstein B (6' 10", $87,200 list)
Without a doubt, this piano had the "cleanest" sound of any that I've played.
Want harmonics and overtones? Forget about it -- the sound is all, pure
fundamentals. The sound seemed to decay rather quickly, too. The action is
incredibly light, almost too
much so. Subjectively, it sounds like a piano that has that "just got tuned"
sound to it. As with many other German grands, these are beautifully made and
finished. Very expensive.
Grotrian Concert (7' 5", $62,000 list)
Another beauty from Germany. The tone was light and quick, although not as
thin or "clean" as the Bechstein. Amazing bass, gorgeous finish. It was hard
to tear myself away from this piano. Expensive and hard to find.
Kawai RX-6 (7', $30,990 list)
I'm not going to get into the thick of the Yamaha vs Kawai debate. I'm used to
Yamahas, but I don't disparage anyone who prefers the Kawai units. In short,
the Yamahas are brighter (detractors would say harsher), louder, and cleaner
sounding, and a little short on the decay time.
In contrast, the Kawais tend to be softer, warmer, even slightly
mushy-sounding. One isn't necessarily better than the other, they're just
different. Like the Yamahas, Kawai actions are nearly flawless and a joy to
play on.
I liked this piano, but since I "grew up" with Yamahas, I was more comfortable
with the C6. Had I spent time with Kawais in my earlier days, I might well
have preferred the RX-6. It all comes down to your tastes.
Petrof III (6' 4", $21,980 list)
Remarkable value in a quality, medium-sized grand from the Czech Republic. The
tone was very pleasant, with just the right amount of overtones, not too harsh.
However, the 2 samples I played both had very tight key bushings, to the point
where a few keys on each
piano got stuck and wouldn't return. This can and should be fixed by any
conscientious dealer.
The Petrof III uses Renner action parts. Also available is the Petrof III-M,
which uses complete Renner actions, has other minor upgrades, and sells for
substantially more ($30,780.) Had I lived closer to the Petrof dealer, I might
very well have wound up with one. These Petrof pianos are gorgeously finished.
Schimmel CC208 (6' 10", $36,580 list)
Having read the raves in Larry Fine's book, I was determined to play one of
these for myself. However, I found that while I liked the piano overall, it
didn't really get my juices flowing. The sound is clean, emphasizing the
fundamental. Also, the sound seemed to decay rather quickly. The Schimmel
sounds and feels a bit like a muffled Yamaha grand, albeit with beautiful
workmanship.
This is a very intimate-sounding piano, and I had trouble getting any real
volume out of it (I have had similar impressions playing other Schimmels.)
Technicians tell me that this is the norm for Schimmel pianos and nothing to
worry about; they're just scaled for accuracy at lower volumes. The unit I
played also had some tight bushings like the Petrof (above).
Schulze-Pollmann 190F (6' 3" $27,900 list)
My heart skipped a beat when I first saw one of these Italian/German hybrids.
The cabinetwork is stunningly beautiful, with intricate but tasteful inlays,
covered by a high-gloss polyester. It's a work of art.
It plays well, too. The sound is robust and clean, and particularly pleasant
in the lower treble. The Renner action works well. Hard to find. Nice
pianos.
Seiler Maestro 180 (5' 11", $33,510 list)
You couldn't ask for a more different piano than the clean-sounding Grotrian
and especially the Bechstein grands. The Seiler tone is thick, robust, and
just plain loud. It had an abnormally-long decay time as well. If the
Bechstein pianos are like a glass of fine wine, a Seiler is like a big frosty
mug of beer. When I first played it I thought it might have been a bit out of
tune, but after a while I realized the designers meant it to sound this way.
While I was intrigued by the boomy, muddy sound at first, it began to drive me
nuts after about ten minutes. Personally, I also don't care for the styling,
although the pianos are admittedly beautifully-made and very expensive-looking.
Your tastes in sound and
appearance may differ from mine, however. It's worth a look if you like this
kind of sound. Pricey for its size.
Steinway B (6' 10 1/2", $51,200 list)
Incredible piano. It has a beautiful tone, generous bass, and a lustrous,
full-bodied tone. In fact I felt as if the piano was "helping" me play. I
spent about a half an hour with a well-regulated and voiced unit, and almost
fell in love with it -- then I saw the price. Don't expect any massive
discounting either. The piano I played (in basic black satin) had a $60,000
asking price (above list!)
__________________________________________
Well, there you have it. If price were no object I would have taken either the
Steinway or the Grotrian. While I'm fantasizing, I'll ask a couple of rich
friends to buy Bechsteins and Seilers for their homes so I can visit them get a
different perspective on things once in a while.
However, money is always an issue, and the Yamahas were 1/3 to 1/2 the cost of
the German and American hand-made beauties. The decision came down to the C5,
C6, or the Petrof. I picked the C6 due to my familiarity with the Yamaha line,
although I don't think I would have been unhappy with any of them.
-Ed Ting
Larry Christianson
I am on a similar piano hunting mission and have tried many of the same
pianos. My impressions are about the same, but I think I prefer the
European sound at bit more than you.
The Yamaha C-6 is a fine piano and is on my short list of possibilities; but
I prefer the Schimmel 6-10. Petroffs are OK, but I think a bit over-hyped;
a good alternative here are the Charles Walter pianos which I found very
nice for the price. All the Steinway 'B's I have tried seemed muddy and
indistinct.
I haven't had the pleasure of trying a Groatian or Seiler and still want to
try M&H and Blunther. My current favorite is a 6'-7" Bosendorfer which
really sang for me, budget-wise really a stretch.
cjt&trefoil
>
> Thank you for your impressions.
>
> I am on a similar piano hunting mission and have tried many of the same
> pianos. My impressions are about the same, but I think I prefer the
> European sound at bit more than you.
>
Can you define "the European sound" for me, please? The only context
in which I've heard it before makes me question its existence.
Thomas D. Seay, III
> Larry Christianson wrote:
> > My impressions are about the same, but I think I prefer the
> > European sound at bit more than you.
> >
> <snip>
>
> Can you define "the European sound" for me, please? The only context
> in which I've heard it before makes me question its existence.
I have always perceived the European sound as being rounded and mellow,
voiced with an emphasis on the fundamental of the note, rather than its
upper partials. In other words, where a Steinway might sound bright or
robust, a Petrof, Grotrian, Bechstein or Boesendorfer might sound somewhat
more subdued or sweeter, if you will, by comparison.
Both "sounds" are equally valid, IMO. It all depends on your preference.
Regards,
Tom
--
Tom Seay
School of Music
The University of Texas at Austin
Larry Christianson
this group as darker, more mellow, clearer and more cantabile. Perhaps it
is a lack of overtones and harmonics which you find in Steinways and the
better Asian pianos.
These are qualities which I have heard in Bosendorfer, to a lesser extent
the Schimmel; the Petroffs which I have heard are too bright to qualify in
my mind. I have only heard older Bechsteins and Blunthers, but would say
that they qualify; supposedly the Hamburg Steinways do as well.
I don't know if it is scale design, softer hammers or what; certainly there
is a spectrum of sound qualities in
all the pianos you discussed. There are some which in my mind I have placed
as 'European' sound. I'm not a tech or salesman, just a fellow traveller
looking for his ideal piano.
BTW: I checked out your web page and looked over your telescope reviews.
I'm an amateur astronomer, not very active these days since I moved into a
city. I've built many scopes over the years from a 4 1/4" Scheispeigler to
a 12 1/2" Newtonian Dob. My eyes aren't great so the building was always
more fun than the viewing for me.
LEC
cjt&trefoil wrote in message <37A376...@prodigy.net>...
>Larry Christianson wrote:
>>
>> Thank you for your impressions.
>>
>> I am on a similar piano hunting mission and have tried many of the same
>> pianos. My impressions are about the same, but I think I prefer the
Eting
> but I think I prefer the European sound at bit more than you.
>The Yamaha C-6 is a fine piano and is on >my short list of possibilities; but
>I prefer the Schimmel 6-10.
Actually, I am in agreement with you. Had the prices for the two pianos been
equal, or even with 20% or so of each other, I would have taken the Schimmel.
The Schimmel is the better instrument. However, the price for the CC208 was
just too high for my blood.
-Ed
Ken Iisaka
news:q%Go3.101$7g4.10545@nntp1...
> Thank you for your impressions.
>
> I am on a similar piano hunting mission and have tried many of the same
> European sound at bit more than you.
>
> The Yamaha C-6 is a fine piano and is on my short list of possibilities;
but
over-hyped;
> a good alternative here are the Charles Walter pianos which I found very
> nice for the price. All the Steinway 'B's I have tried seemed muddy and
> indistinct.
C6, and its more expensive cousin, S6, are my favourite Yamaha pianos. I
have certainly seen well made S6 in Yamaha's showroom in Tokyo; however, the
price of S6 is indeed comparable to that of a Steinway B.
Perhaps the Steinway B's you have tried are brand new ones of New York make.
The hammers are often indeed very soft, and may sound as you described.
However, after proper voicing and use, they can sound anything but muddy and
indistinct. My 20-year old Hamburg B can almost blow the roof off the
house, yet capable of whispering so sweetly. To me, it's the ultimate
piano.
> I haven't had the pleasure of trying a Groatian or Seiler and still want
to
> try M&H and Blunther. My current favorite is a 6'-7" Bosendorfer which
> really sang for me, budget-wise really a stretch.
Indeed, it's absolutely mind-boggling to see pianos that cost many times
more than a Steinway.
Fredisg
Irwin Goldberg....pianist, conductor.
M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk
t.s...@mail.utexas.edu (Thomas D. Seay, III) wrote:
> In article <37A376...@prodigy.net>, chel...@prodigy.net wrote:
>
> > Larry Christianson wrote:
>
> > > European sound at bit more than you.
> > >
> >
> > Can you define "the European sound" for me, please? The only
context
> > in which I've heard it before makes me question its existence.
>
mellow,
> voiced with an emphasis on the fundamental of the note, rather than
its
> upper partials. In other words, where a Steinway might sound bright or
My Schimmel is certainly bright, and anyway, don't they make Steinway in
Hamburg anymore. I think the term is more often used when comparing
Japanese pianos, which though I admire, I find thin. European pianos on
the other hand tend to have a richer more complexed combination of
partitals. They may well favour the fundamental but there are plenty
higher partials in for example a Schimmel. I like the word rounder, I
personally find that expresses the differences best. Particularly when
comparing Japanese pianos to european.
Mike
> robust, a Petrof, Grotrian, Bechstein or Boesendorfer might sound
somewhat
> more subdued or sweeter, if you will, by comparison.
>
> Both "sounds" are equally valid, IMO. It all depends on your
preference.
>
> Regards,
>
> Tom
>
> --
> Tom Seay
> School of Music
> The University of Texas at Austin
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.