Old Steinway, New Steinway, New Mason & Hamlin: How do I choose?
Pedro
choices are a relatively lower priced used Steinway from the 1970s
that has had extensive regulation work completed (you can feel it), a
new Steinway at superior prices and a new Mason & Hamlin A or BB at
inbetween prices. The Masons are priced very reasonably compared to
new Steinways. Thus, I offer the following questions to the board and
hope that Larry, Dave and the others whom I have read on other topics
guide me to a decision.
All other things equal, I could buy the M&H pianos if I had a
reasonable deal. What should I consider a reasonably fair discounted
price for a new A or BB? Any recent purchasers want to compare
prices?
The older Steinway is from 1971. Anything that I should be concerned
about elder pianos from this era? What types of questions should I
ask about the work on the piano?
What has been the experience of people who have purchased M&H pianos
from the new ownership? Favorable, unfavorable? PRoblems? Joys?
What can I expect?
I know the advantage in scale design from a larger piano. Should I be
concerned about volume from the larger piano? I would place the piano
in a small room (10 by 15) that opens on two sides to a stairway and a
cathedral ceiling living room. The floor is wood.
I guess anything that folks can tell me about today's M&H would be
appreciated. My tuner that was recommended by my teacher does not
believe M&H has been making enough pianos yet for a good comparison
with Steinways which is my teacher's favorite (from the '20s and 30s
only) and his favorite (any model, any year).
In advance, thanks for the help.
Larry
>choices are a relatively lower priced used Steinway from the 1970s
> a
>new Steinway at superior prices
>and a new Mason & Hamlin A or BB at
>inbetween prices.
I'm going to suggest you do something entirely different. I'm going to suggest
that you not pay so much attention to "names", and open up your options. For
half the price of a new Steinway, and a whole lot less than the price of a new
Mason Hamlin, you can get a Charles Walter. The Walter will hold its own just
fine between these two brands. Find a dealer who knows how and is willing to
set the piano up right, and you'll be amazed.
Larry Fletcher
Pianos Inc
Atlanta GA
Dealer/technician
Doing the work of three men.....Larry, Curly, & Moe
Want to visit another piano related messageboard? Go to the piano discussion
group on my website:
Chris.Aher
I worked as a tech, specializing in S&S grands in NYC during the seventies.
I've been out of the business for about twenty years so my info on newer
instruments is not current. That said, I would not consider purchasing an
instrument from that era unless it was thoroughly inspected by someone who
REALLY knows what they are doing and knows what to look for on S&S grands of
that vintage.
In particular, the actions had Teflon bushings which often had problems with
clicking. I made an awful lot of money repinning actions in those days. I
can't imagine that those actions have improved with age. You would probably
have to replace all of the action parts including the damper underlevers if
this has not already been done. A lot of the hammer sets from that era
weren't so hot either. All that said, many of them could be really fine
instruments with the right technical attention paid to them.
Larry gave you excellent advice. It appears as if there are many more
quality choices on the market these days and it would be to your benefit to
broaden your search.
Good luck,
Chris
"Pedro" <shar...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:fe07467f.02041...@posting.google.com...
Dave Andrews
<< I intend to buy a piano: >>
Enjoy the shopping and evaluation process, Pedro. Don't be in a hurry.
<< I offer the following questions to the board and
hope that Larry, Dave and the others whom I have read on other topics guide me
to a decision. >>
"If a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit.” Matthew
15:14
;-)
<< All other things equal, I could buy the M&H pianos if I had a
reasonable deal. >>
Check with Rich Galassini on the M & H. He posts here regularly and can give
you a decent perspective on them. Perhaps he will see this Friday AM and
respond.
<< The older Steinway is from 1971. Anything that I should be concerned
about elder pianos from this era? >>
Chris Aher has already offered some very solid and expert advice on this one.
<< I know the advantage in scale design from a larger piano. Should I be
concerned about volume from the larger piano? >>
I have a 7' Baldwin in a 14 by 18 foot room with 8 foot ceilings. The volume
of the piano has not been the least bit of a concern to me, but then again, I
am definitely not a "pounder". A Quarter Pounder maybe, but ... I didn't
necessarily need a piano of this size, but it was a great opportunity for me at
the time, and I've enjoyed it immensely for the past 7 or 8 years that I've
owned it. So much so, that I haven't had any sort of urge to even glance
longingly in any other direction.
<< My tuner that was recommended by my teacher does not
believe M&H has been making enough pianos yet for a good comparison
with Steinways >>
Any piano that you can get your hands on and play is fair game for comparison.
If you're buying for name recognition, Steinway has more of it. If you're
buying for performance, it's open season on anything you can evaluate, and
despite the comments from your tuner, I would not miss the opportunity to
closely evaluate all quality instruments in your targeted range.
<< which is my teacher's favorite (from the '20s and 30s
only) and his favorite (any model, any year). >>
All teachers were consumers at some point in time. Most made choices based on
what was available to them. Most never revisit this decision unless they have
been unhappy. And finally, most teachers do not have the opportunity to play
dozens of new pianos from various high quality manufacturers in order to make
informed comparative statements. This is not to dismiss the opinion, only to
suggest that it may be limited in scope.
<< In advance, thanks for the help. >>
My best suggestion would be to do as Larry recommended: broaden your search a
bit. I cannot vouch for the new M & H pianos, nor can I vouch for the Charles
Walters grands. This is because my impressions are second hand in both cases.
I've heard very good things about both, but I would never buy a piano I could
not play personally, and I've not played either of these newer instruments.
For what it's worth, there are some other fine pianos in this category that I
would definitely evaluate, too. Make your early visits to piano dealers a
matter of narrowing the search, but stay aloof of the sales pitches until you
are absolutely focused in one direction. Enjoy yourself. It's sort of like
getting married, and you want to do this job once and be done with it.
Hope this helps a bit, Pedro.
--
With All Due Respect,
Dave Andrews
D. W. Andrews Associates
Church Music System Specialists
"Two Hacks Working Out Of A Garage"
Disclaimer: If there are two ways to take my words,
always assume I was after the cheap laugh.
stef
years ago and it just keeps getting better.
best deal, and general play jazz and classic sound really cool, bass are
exceptionnal, i moved 3 times already and the piano just did not get in any
troubles at all.
go for it.
stephane
"Dave Andrews" <dwas...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20020412000604...@mb-fc.aol.com...
Larry
>Get a boston piano manufactured by steinway.
I hate to have to break this to you Stef, but Steinway doesn't manufacture
Bostons. Kawai manufactures them. It is a mass produced Japanese piano. And
while it is a good piano, it certainly doesn't belong in a lineup with a Mason
Hamlin, Steinway, Walter, and the other premium pianos he is considering.
Richard Galassini
>choices are a relatively lower priced used Steinway from the 1970s
>that has had extensive regulation work completed (you can feel it), a
>new Steinway at superior prices and a new Mason & Hamlin A or BB at
>inbetween prices.
Dear Pedro,
The new Masons are spectacular pianos. The Fine book actually ranks them higher
than the new Steinways. But this doesn't help you if you don't like them. Play
them and listen.
You had mentioned a 1971 that had lots of regulation work done. This could be a
good choice, but definitely have a technician with experience with these pianos
examine it. If you are near Philadelphia, we have thast service. If you aren't,
I'd be happy to help you find someone near you who can help.
Larry is also correct that there are other choices as well. I carry the Charles
Walter pianos and they are very nice instruments.
I hope this helps.
Good Luck,
Richard Galassini
Cunningham Piano Co
Phila,. Pa.
1 (800) 394-1117
URL:http://voce88.tripod.com/richspianopage
Jon Regen
Don't let teflon be the sole reason in deciding against these pianos -
they can still be great instruments.
My first Steinway was a 1974 S with teflon tat I bought from a concert
pianist in NYC. This guy was a monster, and had bought the piano new
in '74, and never changed the teflon. It was actually very playable,
save for the occasional click or two. I changed the parts to all NY
Steinway. and the thing was a beast. You couldn't believe it was an
S, it had a thunderous bass.
Then I moved-up to a 1976 B, which again, was teflon. This time the
teflon was pretty frozen, as the piano hadn't been played much. I
switched-over to Renner parts, keeping the original hammers, and
again, the piano was a beast. I ended-up selling it to another
classical artist, who freaked-out over it. (And gave me $14K above
what I put into it).
Here's the main point - find a great technician who can check the
piano out. I have 2 techs in NYC that cut their teeth on teflon, and
can get it working right - as best as it can. Then, you can always
change-over to new parts. $4-6K is not much to pay for to bring an
already great piano up to speed.
Both 1970's pianos I had had great soundboards and pinblocks - they
held a tuning like you wouldn't believe. I don't think, beyond the
teflon, that you can write-off pianos from these years, or any other
years for that matter. Every piano is different - and needs to be
evaluated on an individual basis.
Teflon is not a thrill to deal with, but a great playing and sounding
Steinway is.
Good-Luck in your piano hunt!
Jon Regen
www.jonregen.com
RonGardini
as impartial as possible.However, it is none of the brands that have been
mentioned.
This week, I toured every piano store in Washington DC and Baltimore. I had the
opportunity to sit and play a Charles Walter Grand. As a player, not a
technician, I found this instrument sort of lackluster. The richness of the
bass was lacking in comparison to other brands that you have mentioned.
Both Rich and Larry tout the CW as a very nice piano, and I am sure that it is.
When I was in NYC I played a couple of Mason Hamlins that were also very nice.
If you have time, and this is a once in a lifetime investment, there are some
equally" very nice" German Pianos that I would think you may wish to consider.
I have a 9 foot piano in my living room which is probably15 by 30 with a
cathedral ceiling. Volume has never been an issue, although I tend to play more
gently.
While I found nothing wrong with a Charles Walter, I found nothing particularly
great about it, and this is simply one more opinion.
Good Luck,
Ron Gardiner
Gerald C
> ...I had the
> opportunity to sit and play a Charles Walter Grand. As a player, not a
> technician, I found this instrument sort of lackluster. The richness of the
> bass was lacking in comparison to other brands that you have mentioned.
As a non-dealer, and just a player, I echo your observation. In my
recent search for a medium grand, I was also pointed to the CW. It
has an excellent reputation, and of course, comes with recommendations
all over. But the sound was thin and unrevealing, and did not live up
to my expectations of a 6'-4" piano, especially in the bass as you
mention. At first, I thought it was room acoustics, but other pianos
on the floor of the same approximate size (both higher priced:
Schimmel, and lower: Kawai) did not suffer any objectionable "room"
effects. I still thought the CW casework and action were outstanding
(if a little stiff). YMMV.
Gerald C
Larry
>to my expectations of a 6'-4" piano, especially in the bass as you
>mention.
If you guys are playing Walter grands that sound thin and have a weak bass, all
I can say is you should come to my store and play one that has been properly
prepped. Thin and weak in the bass is definitely not a characteristic you'll
notice.
Chris Aher
You are right that Teflon bushings can usually be made to work properly.
Keeping them that way is an ongoing maintenance issue that will require
attention from a tech that really understands how to do this. In NYC there
are techs who can do this and also deal with all of the other idiosyncrasies
of the S&S instruments of that era. (and there were plenty) Other areas of
the country may not have techs with the particular knowledge and skill set
to deal with the bushing issue in particular. Unless things have changed in
the last 20 years, dealer techs are not always the best because of sub
standard pay.
Dealing with Teflon bushings is a special skill set. It really isn't
difficult but takes practice and a certain touch to get it consistently
right. It is not as forgiving as felt. It also requires special tools and
center pins. I made my own reamers for instance. The ones sold by S&S for
the purpose cut a little too aggressively for my taste. The standard
tapered reamers used for felt bushings should not be used for Teflon.
These weren't the best years that S&S had quality assurance wise in my
opinion. This doesn't mean that they were necessarily bad instruments.
Most of them were excellent instruments, idiosyncrasies and all. Many could
be made into spectacular instruments with the proper work. The problem is
that if you don't have a tech who really knows what to look for during the
inspection process, you could be setting yourself up for significant ongoing
maintenance expenses. For instance I saw a number of instruments of that
era that had problems with jumpy/creaky tuning pins. This was probably the
result of the tuning pin holes being burned by drilling too quickly or using
cheap and/or dull bits. This made those notes very difficult to tune. The
long term health of the pinblock was also in question.
The upshot of this is that one should go into the purchase of a 60s/70s
vintage S&S grand with their eyes open and with the services of a very
knowledgeable tech.
Regards,
Chris
PS I haven't thought about this stuff in this depth for a really long time.
PPS Next time your in the basement, say hi to Ron for me.
robertandrews
>You couldn't believe it was an S, it had a thunderous bass.
Maybe you had a stretched S.
Pedro
I am in the Boston area. Thus, I cannot take up Rich's offer.
However, if any of you in the business know a dealer, technician or
re-builder in this area that you respect, I would appreciate
references.
I'll try to find the dealer for Charles Walter pianos in the boston
area. Certainly, the price differential deserves a look. but, if
price were no object... (Isn't there another thread on that topic?)
If you had the choice between the M&H A or BB vs the CW piano at a
similar price, which would you pick?
I've tried the Boston pianos and, at first, thought I would start with
a Boston and trade-up to the Steinway. Then, I proceeded to play a few
more pianos. I am beginning to feel the action I would prefer as well
as hear the tone I prefer. The Boston pianos feel is heavy relative
to a re-built, new or older Steinway. Thus, I am not keen on the
bostons at this point.
Another question to the pros: Pianos need a break-in period but will
the break-in lighten the action or brighten the sound? I tried a
couple of Steinways today that had a very "deep" treble. I was not
impressed. (Of course the Concert D being readied for Marcus Roberts
sang in the treble. Thus, the question.)
I intend to visit a dealer of Yamahas and German (Bechstein, Schimmel)
pianos this weekend. I tried some rebuilt Bechsteins, Bluthners and
Bosendorfers. They had great action but I found myself appreciating
the "American" sound. A lesson learned unless if my visit this
weekend proves otherwise.
Thank you for your previous and future posts.
Pedro
Richard Galassini
>I'll try to find the dealer for Charles Walter pianos in the boston
>area. Certainly, the price differential deserves a look. but, if
>price were no object... (Isn't there another thread on that topic?)
>If you had the choice between the M&H A or BB vs the CW piano at a
>similar price, which would you pick?
Well, thats easily answered - Mason & Hamlin ten times over.
Sorry Larry.
Larry
>Well, thats easily answered - Mason & Hamlin ten times over.
>
>Sorry Larry.
>
No problem. My answer wouldn't be the Walter in that case either. My answer
would be a Bechstein Academy Series.
RonGardini
is a friend.
it is interesting to me that during the discussion of higher performance
pianos, no one has suggested a Baldwin. For what it is worth, I worked for
baldwin for over 15 years, and as an alternative to Steinway, has a great
dollar value, and a bass to dir for. All of the nonsense about bankruptcy
aside, you owe it to yourself to try one.
Hmmm...
idiosyncracies? Is there a range of serial numbers that represents the
pianos that were produced with teflon bushings?
"Chris Aher" <Chris...@wcom.com> wrote in message
news:a97m12$12sot$1...@ID-75854.news.dfncis.de...
robert cloutier
> "Jon Regen" <jonr...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >You couldn't believe it was an S, it had a thunderous bass.
>
> Maybe you had a stretched S.
You bet your "S"!!!
robert cloutier
Aside from brand name recognition, are you looking for a musical
instrument, or an investment?
Steinway of course has the name recognition. Steinways from the 70's
have no greater or fewer problems than any Steinway from any era.
Problem is, you MUST have an experienced tech with you to check them
over, someone who knows the problems associated with any particular
vintage.
First and foremost, never believe anything a piano salesperson tells
you; the only reliable info they have is the price.
Used Bechsteins often have cracked plates; once again you need a
really good tech with you. German pianos suffer if close attention is
not paid to humidity protection, especially when you crank the heat
during the winter.
Mason & Hamlins. OK, I really love a great M&H, and I've been through
their factory, which used to be the Falcone factory. "PianoDisc" out
of Sacramento owns M&H. They really bought the company as a vehicle to
market their player-piano gismos. As a result, some changes were made
to the trapwork (the pedals) to make installing their pianodisc
systems easier.
They use "Bolduc" soundboards, made in Canada. These are truly
excellent soundboards, one of the finest produced. Keyboards are
Kluge, and hammers are Renner "blues". I personally dislike the
hammers for their inherent hardness, but having formerly worked for
the largest M&H dealer in NYC, I found that the alchohol/water treated
Renner hammer came around to a more traditional sound of the great
M&H's. Personally, if I bought a new M&H I'd put Steinway hammers on
it and live happily ever after.
M&H has experimented with the tenor section of the model "A", not
being able to decide whether or not to use a few wound strings at the
break or not, and there's some talk about using a full-perimeter plate
in the A as well.
If you're going to buy a new M&H, I'd recommend the BB. This model has
been a "cult" piano for years, and it would be a good investment
should you ever decide to sell. Structurally the new M&H is perfectly
solid.
But absolutely stay away from used ones from the 70's and 80's!
There are models of Steinway not produced in this country for years
which you might examine. The A3 is a great piano - 6'4", and really
sweet if you find one. The "O" was the predecessor to the "L"; same
length, different shape, and generally the "O" was more successful
throughout the entire range of the instrument.
The Charles Walter piano is beautifully made, but placed next to a
Mason or a Steinway will, in my opinion, sound a little thin, but not
nearly as thin as any asian piano; great sustaining qualities though.
I admire the workmanship and dedication Walters has put into this
underappreciated piano. I would own one with no regrets. And I
certainly would rank it #3 overall, and lightyears ahead of anything
made by Baldwin.
Stay away from any new Baldwin. What with plywood key-beds and their
famous jumping tuning pins, well heck, don't get me started. They're
cheap and a bad investment; just price a used one and do the math.
However, find an old one, and I bet you'll like it. Gibson guitars now
owns Baldwin. The first thing the new owners did was to disband the
Concert & Artists department; they have no interest in concert
pianists - just selling to the general public. They obviously don't
take pianos seriously.
good luck