Charles Walter Pianos
Masterhit
wondering about brands and quality. The dealer's opinion was that
Charles Walter pianos were style over substance... pretty furniture
with average instruments inside. Of course he said Yamaha pianos were
significantly better in sound and 'instrument quality' .. but then
again he doesn't sell Charles Walter pianos.
I was wondering what those more in the know would say about various
brands .. and which ones are considered 'good' which are generally of
'poor' quality and which are (in your opinion) the best overall for an
average consumer (read: middle class) looking for a nice starter
piano.
My hope is to get a good starter piano - used is just fine so long as
it is in good playable condition *and* is reasonably attractive. I
want a reputable brand that would be considered 'well built' both
structurally and in the sound it produces.
I know this is very subjective.. but I just wanted a general feel from
the crowd online.
One note - I generally prefer richer/fuller sounds.
Thanks so much.
Wm
ptooner
"Masterhit" <indust...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:f3b449ab.04020...@posting.google.com...
your own definition of some terms. For instance, what is a "starter piano"
to you? What is "reasonably attractive"? How much do you want to spend?
Having asked all those questions, I'll try to give you some idea of ranking.
I'm assuming the Steinways and high end europeans are not in the price range
you are considering. Anyway, the worst pianos are the chinese built, along
with some of the eastern bloc pianos. Both of these groups are improving
quickly. Next up from the bottom is probably the Indonesian pianos, which
can be acceptable for beginning home use I think. Then comes the Korean
pianos which are built by either Samick or Young Chang regardless of what
name is on them. Next up is the japanese pianos, and that takes us up to
overlapping the high priced spread. ;-)
You mentioned you preferred a "richer fuller sound" which is to say the
more American sound. The asian sounds are brighter and shriller and Yamaha
is the best example of that. It is really hard to advise you about sounds,
though, it is too individual. Yamaha is probably the largest or second
largest producer of pianos in the world, so many people must like them.
But I digress. The brand is not nearly so important as the country
where the piano is built. The only two american companies still producing
pianos are Steinway and Charles Walters. Baldwin I'm not sure about - they
have been bought out of bankruptcy and are something of an unknown quantity
at the moment. In the past they delivered good value for money.
It is probably more important to buy from a merchant you trust than to
be too concerned about the brand name. There are a lot of real scoundrels
in this business. Many of them operate out of "warehouses" and are here
today and gone tomorrow. Oh, one last thing. There is no such thing as a
"once in a lifetime deal" and there is no such thing as a piano sale. When
a dealer spends a ton of money on advertising an event, he has to get more
for his pianos to pay for the advertising, not less.
Gerry
H. Emmerson Meyers
in this country today!!!
"ptooner" <no...@yourlife.com> wrote in message
news:cUcUb.19555$CJ1.3066@lakeread01...
Larry
>A recent visit to a local (primarily Yamaha)piano dealership left me
>wondering about brands and quality. The dealer's opinion was that
>Charles Walter pianos were style over substance...
>Of course he said Yamaha pianos were
>significantly better in sound and 'instrument quality' .. but then
>again he doesn't sell Charles Walter pianos.
>My hope is to get a good starter piano -
>One note - I generally prefer richer/fuller sounds.
Your Yamaha dealer is engaging in dirt tossing sales tactics. In other words,
he's a slimeball who doesn't know how to sell what he has so he has to tear
down everything else. I wouldn't buy a piece of gum from a dealer like that.
The Walter piano is an excellent instrument, far and away superior to Yamaha.
Telling you a Yamaha is superior to it is like telling you a Toyota is superior
to a Mercedes. Both are good, but they don't compete with each other. They are
in different categories. In the same way, the Walter and the Yamaha are in
different categories.
Here is a way for you to find this out for yourself. Go to a dealer who sells
Walter pianos, and have him take the piano apart. Remove the bottom panel, and
remove the panel the music desk is attached to. You should be able at this
point to stand back from the piano and see the strings from top to bottom, and
the action mechanism inside.
Now - look at the two panels. Notice how they are made. Notice how thick they
are. Notice they are made of real wood. Look at the side panels on the piano.
Notice how thick they are made. Walk around to the back of the piano, and
notice they are made of real wood. While you're back there, take note of the
tight, straight grain of the soundboard. Now look inside the piano and notice
the fit and finish on the inside. Notice the case is finished on the inside
just like it is on the outside. Look at the action. Notice its size, and that
it is all wood. Tell the salesman you want him to simply remain quiet, and let
you observe. You'll let him tell you about it when you come back.
Now go do the same thing at the Yamaha dealer. Notice how thin the two panels
are. Notice they are made of particleboard with a cheap veneer. Notice how thin
the side panels are. Walk around to the back, and notice how the side panels
are also made of thin particleboard with a cheap, thin veneer. While you're
back there, notice how crooked the grain is in the sounboard wood, and how
uneven and wide the growth rings are. Look inside. Notice the case isn't
finished on the inside. Notice how small the action is in comparison to the
Walter. Notice all the sheet metal screws into aluminum rails, and notice the
plastic parts. Tell the slimeball....sorry... "salesman" to shut his mouth and
sit down somewhere so you can make your own mind up without his unprofessional
input.
Now --- after you've done that, remember that the action in the Yamaha is made
in China, where all the cheap pianos people keep telling you to avoid are made.
Remember the power of brand name recognition. Remember that Yamaha cranks
their's out on assembly lines, and Walter builds their's by hand, with Yamaha
building about 100 to every Walter. Once you've done this, you will know
precisely why the Yamaha is simply not in the same league as the Walter.
Trashing other brands is how most Yamaha dealers sell their pianos, at least
from my experience. I've never known one who didn't sell that way. I once had a
customer tell me that a salesman at another store had told her not to buy a
Walter because "they buy their screws and bolts and things like that from Home
Depot. If they run out of screws for the action, they'll just go down to Home
Depot and buy another box, and start using them, even though they might not
even be the same kind of screw - you'll see the screws change halfway up the
action"..... Can you believe such crap?
Now, is the Walter the piano for you? Not if you're looking for a starter
piano. That's what a Yamaha is. The Walter will be too expensive for you.
But--- you want a richer, fuller sound, and you're not going to get that from a
Yamaha. That will only come from a higher quality piano... like a Walter, or a
Steinway, or any of the other pianos in its class. That will cost you money.
You may want to look for a higher quality used piano.
Larry
Doing the work of 3 men - Larry, Curly, & Moe
Caution: I do not brake for sales weasels
Isaac
still have to disagree with the dealer's comment..."Charles Walter
pianos are style over substance". Any respectable musician that plays
a Walter would realize from the start that the quality goes far beyond
the cabinet. Simply put, the piano sounds and feels absolutely
great!!
The only problem I've experienced with them is that the bass notes are
usually very muddy sounding (nothing a good tech can't fix).
The dealer also is quoted saying, "Yamaha pianos were significantly
better in sound and 'instrument quality'. First, the way a piano
sounds is generally subjective to the listener's ear. Do I think
Yamaha sounds better than CW? Absolutely, but that wouldn't stop me
from owning a Walter. BTW, just how does one define "instrument
quality"? This could mean a number of factors. Both instruments are,
IMHO, very high quality pianos. The Yamahas are mass produced and the
Walters are hand-made. For me, this makes no difference. To some,
however, it is often a deciding factor.
My preference....Yamaha P22 then the Charles Walter 1500 (both 45"
verticals).
Hope this helps!
Isaac B.
Raleigh/Durham
indust...@yahoo.com (Masterhit) wrote in message news:<f3b449ab.04020...@posting.google.com>...
Katzelmacher
made in the USA too?
Rick Hollett
piano. That's what a Yamaha is>>
Not to be nitpicky Larry, but if you have such a low opinion of the Yamaha,
why recommend it as a starter piano? Isn't there a better choice?
regards
Rick Hollett
"Larry" <larryin...@aol.composer> wrote in message
news:20040204211332...@mb-m29.aol.com...
Larry
>Not to be nitpicky Larry, but if you have such a low opinion of the Yamaha,
>why recommend it as a starter piano? Isn't there a better choice?
Well, yes there is, for a starter piano. Yamaha's low end stuff is made in
either China or Georgia, all of it simply a tradeoff on the name recognition.
For a starter piano in a vertical, I'd just as soon have a Pearl River or one
of the Dong Bhei built verticals as a Yamaha - the quality is as good and
actually better in some areas, and for far less money.
My main issue was the crap the salesman tried to spread. A Walter vertical is a
better built piano than anything Yamaha offers, both in terms of design,
materials, and in workmanship. It will outperform anything they build also,
with the U3 being the only one with any hope of competing.
The salesman's trashing of the Walter instead of selling his own product was
tacky and unprofessional. He deserved to have it thrown back in his face. The
piano industry is so corrupt with this kind of lying and unprofessionalism that
as an industry they came up with a Code of Ethics a few years ago, hoping to
put a lid on this kind of stuff and try to restore some sense of credibility to
the piano industry. They were getting to the point of being worse than used car
salesmen. Unfortunately my experience has shown me that Yamaha dealers have
decided not to sign onto this Code of Ethics. The salesman in this scenario is
an example of that, and one that is all too common .
ptooner
"H. Emmerson Meyers" <vkr...@starpower.net> wrote in message
news:40218704$0$8374$61fe...@news.rcn.com...
> You forgot to mention Mason & Hamlin--arguably the finest piano being
built
> in this country today!!!
I didn't really forget, I didn't mention Bosendorfer either. I didn't think
M&H made anything that could be called a "starter" piano.
Gerry
ptooner
"Katzelmacher" <Yo...@Fly.com> wrote in message
news:4021B4C3...@Fly.com...
> I don't know much about the Astin-Weight piano, but aren't they still
being
> made in the USA too?
The Astin Weight makes two verticals and one horizontal. The verticals are
$8k and $13k and the horizontal is $35k. A very small quantity manufactured
and not really "starter priced". I wasn't trying to cover every individual
brand.
Gerry
Cy Shuster
his extensive acoustical research (Fandrich).
--Cy--
Marc Sabatella
product was
> tacky and unprofessional.
As opposed to your trashing of Yamaha? Surely you are aware that your
opinion is not universal?
--------------
Marc Sabatella
ma...@outsideshore.com
The Outside Shore
Music, art, & educational materials:
http://www.outsideshore.com/
drsmith
Larry <larryin...@aol.composer> wrote:
>>From: indust...@yahoo.com (Masterhit)
>
>
>>Of course he said Yamaha pianos were
>>significantly better in sound and 'instrument quality' .. but then
>>again he doesn't sell Charles Walter pianos.
>
>>My hope is to get a good starter piano -
>
>>One note - I generally prefer richer/fuller sounds.
>
>Now go do the same thing at the Yamaha dealer. Notice how thin the two panels
>are. Notice they are made of particleboard with a cheap veneer. Notice how thin
>the side panels are. Walk around to the back, and notice how the side panels
>are also made of thin particleboard with a cheap, thin veneer. While you're
>back there, notice how crooked the grain is in the sounboard wood, and how
>uneven and wide the growth rings are. Look inside. Notice the case isn't
>finished on the inside. Notice how small the action is in comparison to the
>Walter. Notice all the sheet metal screws into aluminum rails, and notice the
>plastic parts. Tell the slimeball....sorry... "salesman" to shut his mouth and
>sit down somewhere so you can make your own mind up without his unprofessional
>input.
>
>Larry
Respectfully, I did do this inspection on a Yamaha P22 that was built
less than one year ago. I did not find the faults you mention in the
above paragraph. Yes, the inside of the piano isn't finished, but that's
really the only fault I found - if you must call it a fault, that is. For
me, I'd say it's a feature if they chose to finish the inside, but
otherwise, I don't see how this would negatively impact the sound, fit,
or function of the instrument. If I recall, the soundboard was finished
on both sides.
I'm still debating whether to buy it or not, actually.
ptooner
"Marc Sabatella" <ma...@outsideshore.com> wrote in message
news:1024u2p...@corp.supernews.com...
> > The salesman's trashing of the Walter instead of selling his own
> product was
> > tacky and unprofessional.
>
> As opposed to your trashing of Yamaha? Surely you are aware that your
> opinion is not universal?
Wellll, I just went back and read Larry's post. While his tone might not
have been too civil, his statements were factual rather than opinionated.
The only obvious exception being where he uses the term "cheap veneer" which
is a statement not backed up by facts to the best of my knowledge. That is,
all pianos are faced in veneer and I don't know that Yamaha's veneer is any
cheaper than anyone else's. It is a fact that many Yamahas now use chinese
built actions, and the great majority of them are particle board
construction. It doesn't harm anything to leave the inside unfinished, but
it is certainly unattactive. The sheet metal screws force threaded into
aluminum don't make for ease of maintenance in the future either.
It is also a fact that many Yamaha salesmen try to give the impression
that the pianos are of Japanese construction when in fact more and more are
being built wherever they can build them the cheapest - usually China. They
don't mention that.
Gerry
Marc Sabatella
> Wellll, I just went back and read Larry's post. While his tone might
not
> have been too civil, his statements were factual rather than
opinionated.
It is pure fact that Yamaha is like Toyota in a way Walter is like
Mercedes? Not the slightest bit of opinion in that statement?
Some of his statements were fact-based, to be sure, but even so, the
facts were certainly slanted. For example, focusing only on the aspects
of the construction where Yamaha is perceived as being inferior, not
mentioning any differences in how well the action actually performs or
how the instrument sounds. Plus all sorts of opinionated value
judgements - eg, Walter does X, Yamaha does Y, with the unsupported
implied assumption that X is better than Y. Not to mention words like
"slimeball".
Overall, the post was hatchet job of exactly the same order as allegedly
perpetrated by the Yamaha salesman.
Tom Shaw
Walter not trashing. I believe what is was trashing was the typical Yamaha
salesman and his tactics. I do not agree that Larry's post was tacky and
unprofessional...especially since he is no longer in the "profession" of
selling pianos.
TS
12AX7A
> A recent visit to a local (primarily Yamaha)piano dealership left me
> wondering about brands and quality. The dealer's opinion was that
> Charles Walter pianos were style over substance... pretty furniture
> with average instruments inside. Of course he said Yamaha pianos were
On the flip side, I've heard dealers selling Charles Walter pianos
present equally disparaging arguments against Yamaha pianos. Sales
people often embellish the facts to their advantage, some much less
honestly than others.
Disclaimer - I'm an electrical engineer and not a piano salesman. I
studied piano privately for 12 years and have played for over 30
years. What follows are my own personal opinions, and I don't even
own a Yamaha.
Charles Walter verticals are indeed well made and the action feels
quite nice. I've yet to play one that I like the sound of...and I
exclusively play classical music. If you happen to like the Charles
Walter sound then who am I to argue?
Will a Walter vertical outperform a Yamaha U1 or U3? Outperform at
what? Sound? Well no, not if I like the Yamaha tone better? Does
outperform mean I can play the the Le Tombeau de Couperin Toccata
faster on a CW versus a U3? My internal cause/effect algorithms can
synapse through my brain for my own conclusion on that one.
Yamaha and Walter both make good pianos. Perhaps the only thing worse
than buying one brand over the other is letting someone else tell you
which one YOU like better.
Larry
>Overall, the post was hatchet job of exactly the same order as allegedly
>perpetrated by the Yamaha salesman.
>
That was exactly what it was intended to be. It was payback to the Yamaha
salesman who misinformed the customer by claiming the Walter was all looks no
substance. Not a shred of truth in that. At least I used facts when I trashed
Yamaha. I'm not the one who picks out their materials, you know. They built it,
not me.
As to "cheap veneer" - yes, all pianos use veneer. But if you look at the
veneer on a Walter and compare it to the veneer on the Yamaha M series for
example, you'll find the veneer on the Yamaha is paper thin, while the Walter
uses high quality veneers.
I know it doesn't matter if a piano is finished on the inside - but I think it
should be fairly obvious that if one piano does and one doesn't, it isn't the
lower quality one that is doing it.
All I did was take the two pianos' cases off, and tell you what was inside each
of them, and how each was built. If anyone - you included - can prove one
single thing I said was inaccurate, feel free to do so. You can't, so while you
may not like the blunt way I presented the Yamaha, I presented it factually. I
wanted the customer to realize just how slimy the Yamaha salesman had been.
That's what we're supposed to try to do here - sort the truth out from the crap
they get told, and help them make an intelligent decision. I suppose you'd have
preferred that I *not* present the facts about how the Yamaha is made?
Larry
>Respectfully, I did do this inspection on a Yamaha P22 that was built
>less than one year ago. I did not find the faults you mention in the
>above paragraph. Yes, the inside of the piano isn't finished, but that's
>really the only fault I found - if you must call it a fault, that is. For
>me, I'd say it's a feature if they chose to finish the inside, but
>otherwise, I don't see how this would negatively impact the sound, fit,
>or function of the instrument. If I recall, the soundboard was finished
>on both sides.
>
>I'm still debating whether to buy it or not, actually.
>
The P22 is one of Yamaha's better verticals. But it isn't a starter piano. As
for the soundboard, I didn't say they weren't finished on both sides, I said to
look at the grain in the wood. The critical things to look for in quality
soundboard spruce is tight, evenly spaced, straight grain, with few waves in
the grain. Look in any premium grand over 20K, and notice how straight and
tight the grain is. There is a reason this is important. Then look at the
Walter vertical. Same quality. Now look at the P22. Wavy, wide grained panels,
not the same quality as they use in their grands, and certainly not the same
quality you found in the Walter or a premium grand of any brand you choose.
Now measure the total key length. Not the part sticking out for you to play -
open the piano up and measure the keysticks all the way to the back. The Walter
keys are much longer. This gives you better control. Look at where the balance
rail (inside, you'll find each key has a metal pin it sits on that sticks up
through the key). The further away from the playing part of the key that
balance rail is located, the more even the touch will be. This is one thing
that helps a grand have such good balance. The balance rail is far away from
the playing portion (the part with the keytops). The Walter vertical's balance
rail is quite a distance away from the playing portion of the key. Look at the
P22. The balance rail is right on top of you - in fact, it is just on the other
side of the trim strip that the fallboard is attached to. The keys in the P22
are much shorter. Now whether this matters to you or not, only you can say.
Most people can feel a distinct difference, with the Walter having a far
superior touch to the Yamaha.
If you looked at the action in the P22, you'd see the aluminum rails instead of
the heavy hard maplewood rail in the Walter, which also has a piece of cast
angle iron imbedded in it for heavy duty stability. You'd have noticed the
plastic action parts in the Yamaha vertical, as opposed to the wooden parts in
the Walter.
Whether or not any of this matters to you is a side issue to the fact that this
is not how a piano is built when it is "just a pretty case with no substance in
it".
My comparison was done to help you understand for yourself how to evaluate the
pianos, without having to put up with slimy salesmen feeding you
misinformation. If you felt I was being unfair to the Yamaha, then you missed
my point, so just forget it. Others *did* get it.
I don't care one way or the other what you buy. I just don't like salesmen
using lies and misinformation to sell their products, and I don't like seeing
the public falling victim to it. But knowing the quality of the two pianos, I
was not going to sit quietly and let the whole world read the crap the salesman
said about the Walter go by unchallenged. *Someone* benefitted.
Larry
>On the flip side, I've heard dealers selling Charles Walter pianos
>present equally disparaging arguments against Yamaha pianos.
True. Slimy salesmen are everywhere.
>Yamaha and Walter both make good pianos. Perhaps the only thing worse
>than buying one brand over the other is letting someone else tell you
>which one YOU like better.
Absolutely correct. Equally bad is to make a buying decision based on one brand
being misrepresented. A comparison between a U3 and a Walter is a valid one.
The fellow said he was looking for a starter piano, however. Neither the U3 or
the Walter is a starter piano. It is reasonable to assume the salesman was
showing the customer a low end model that fit the customer's price range, then
using the name Yamaha as if everything they build is of the same quality, and
trying to smear a piano he had no need to smear. The Walter was most likely out
of the price range being considered. Now the P22 has been brought up. I assure
you, if anyone offers you a Walter vertical for the price a P22 can be had for,
no one with accurate information would pass up a Walter for that kind of money.
But as you said, you should buy what you like. Just have the facts, not
salesmen's lies.
drsmith
Larry <larryin...@aol.composer> wrote:
>>From: drsm...@hotmail.com (drsmith)
>
>>Respectfully, I did do this inspection on a Yamaha P22 that was built
>>less than one year ago. I did not find the faults you mention in the
>>above paragraph. Yes, the inside of the piano isn't finished, but that's
>>really the only fault I found - if you must call it a fault, that is. For
>>me, I'd say it's a feature if they chose to finish the inside, but
>>otherwise, I don't see how this would negatively impact the sound, fit,
>>or function of the instrument. If I recall, the soundboard was finished
>>on both sides.
>>
>>I'm still debating whether to buy it or not, actually.
>>
>
>The P22 is one of Yamaha's better verticals. But it isn't a starter piano. As
>for the soundboard, I didn't say they weren't finished on both sides, I said to
>look at the grain in the wood. The critical things to look for in quality
>soundboard spruce is tight, evenly spaced, straight grain, with few waves in
>the grain. Look in any premium grand over 20K, and notice how straight and
>tight the grain is. There is a reason this is important. Then look at the
>Walter vertical. Same quality. Now look at the P22. Wavy, wide grained panels,
>not the same quality as they use in their grands, and certainly not the same
>quality you found in the Walter or a premium grand of any brand you choose.
>
I did look closely at the soundboard and I still didn't see the grain
flaws that you mentioned above. For the record, I've never seen a
Walter - they just aren't around this area.
>If you looked at the action in the P22, you'd see the aluminum rails instead of
>the heavy hard maplewood rail in the Walter, which also has a piece of cast
>angle iron imbedded in it for heavy duty stability. You'd have noticed the
>plastic action parts in the Yamaha vertical, as opposed to the wooden parts in
>the Walter.
I don't recall seeing any plastic anywhere in the construction of this
particular model. That isn't to say it may not be in there somewhere, but
I did take a good look at the action and I can't say I recall any plastic
parts. Also, the sheet metal screw argument is really a non-issue. Simply
put, a sheet metal screw is a piece of technology used to simplify
construction. I've have very little trouble with them (if I had any
trouble at all) in the hundreds of products I use everyday. Even my
car - which isn't a cheap expense, either - probably has a thousand or
more of them. They do the job for which they were intended and they've
performed quite well. Faulting the construction of a product on this basis
is simply being a "it must be hand made starting with the invention of the
wheel" purist.
>I don't care one way or the other what you buy. I just don't like salesmen
>using lies and misinformation to sell their products, and I don't like seeing
>the public falling victim to it. But knowing the quality of the two pianos, I
>was not going to sit quietly and let the whole world read the crap the salesman
>said about the Walter go by unchallenged. *Someone* benefitted.
That's fair - it's just that I did the inspection you recommended and I
couldn't agree with what was said. Maybe the particular specimen I looked
at was better than average - or maybe not. I just wanted to offer my
observations as well, and if I were willing to take the salesman at face
value, I certainly wouldn't be reading this group.
ptooner
DC area yesterday, Oren music. They have about 8 or 10 stores but all under
the same company. Anyway, I asked the salesman specifically whether the
action on the P22 was made in China. I told him I knew that some actions
were, but I didn't know specifically about that one. He told me quite
emphatically that the "insides" (strung back?) were made in Japan and the
cases were made in Thomaston Ga. He said "No yamaha actions are made in
China."
Gerry
"Larry" <larryin...@aol.composer> wrote in message
Larry
>I did look closely at the soundboard and I still didn't see the grain
>flaws that you mentioned above. For the record, I've never seen a
>Walter - they just aren't around this area.
>
Then you can't make the comparison I was talking about, so it doesn't matter.
>Also, the sheet metal screw argument is really a non-issue.
Hardly. You aren't a technician, so you aren't in a position to declare it a
nonissue. It may be a nonissue to you, and that's fine. But it isn't a
nonissue.
>Simply
>put, a sheet metal screw is a piece of technology used to simplify
>construction.
Thank you. Some design decisions are made for the purpose of simplifying
construction. Some make a different decision for the purpose of longevity. You
haven't seen the alternative, nor are you a technician. You are entitled to
your opinion, but it doesn't change the fact higher quality pianos don't use
sheet metal screws, and for a very good reason.
> I've have very little trouble with them
And how many pianos with sheet metal screws holding the action together do you
have experience with?
>Faulting the construction of a product on this basis
>is simply being a "it must be hand made starting with the invention of the
>wheel" purist.
I don't think you're getting it... I'm not "faulting" the construction, I'm
pointing out how the two are made, and that one is built better than the other.
If you like sheet metal screws, that's fine. But traditional action screws
screwed into hard maple the way the big boys do it is a more costly, but
superior method. Ask any tech that has overtightened a sheetmetal screw in a
flange.
>That's fair - it's just that I did the inspection you recommended and I
>couldn't agree with what was said.
But by your own admission you don't have a Walter piano anywhere around to make
the comparison. That's like saying you couldn't find a concert grand to listen
to, but you played a baby grand, and you just can't agree that a difference
exists.
> I just wanted to offer my
>observations as well, and if I were willing to take the salesman at face
>value, I certainly wouldn't be reading this group.
And you have a right to offer your observations. But please bear two things in
mind - you are operating from the viewpoint that I am telling you the Yamaha
isn't a good piano, and you are telling me you can't see the differences
between two pianos after only having seen one of them. I am *not* saying the
Yamaha is a bad piano. Of course it isn't. This started with a story about a
Yamaha salesman dismissing the Walter as an inferior piano to the Walter, in
fact inferior to just about any piano, when you get right down to it. I was not
saying the Yamaha was a bad piano, I was telling those who aren't technicians
what to look for between the two to find the differences between them, and why
the Walter was superior. It *is* superior to the Yamaha, but that doesn't mean
the Yamaha isn't a good piano. It just doesn't follow that one has to be
worthless just because the other is better.
I have 30+ years as a technician, rebuilder, and dealer. I'm also a musician. I
offered my insight, and my experience, to correct bad information. If you want
an unbiased second opinion on it all from a respected source, I suggest you go
buy a copy of The Piano Book. I think you'll find I have been quite consistent
with the facts.
That said, I'm not trying to argue with you, and if you like the P22 by all
means get it. But you haven't even seen the other piano in question, so you
can't make the comparison. I would think that if you're about to spend this
kind of money, you'd want to at least *look* at the Walter. Wouldn't you hate
to run into one a year from now and leave thinking "I could have had *that*
instead!" ? I'm known for saying things in a blunt fashion, cutting through
the crap and getting to the point. It was not my intention to offend you, or
make you feel you have to defend your opinions. But you can't vote in a taste
test until you've tasted both entries.
Larry
>He said "No yamaha actions are made in
>China."
I stood there in the factory in Thomaston and watched them take the Chinese
actions, fully assembled, out of the cardboard cartons. I saw the Chinese
writing all over the boxes, and I saw the Chinese writing on the hang tags each
one had attached to it. I spoke to the management member regarding the actions,
and he had no issue about admitting that *all* the actions used in the
Thomaston assembled pianos are built in China.
I have no doubt the salesman claimed otherwise. There's an old joke in the
piano business.... what's the difference in a used car salesman and a piano
salesman..... the used car salesman *knows* when he's lying.
This really isn't that much of an issue, by the way. The actions are perfectly
fine for that level of piano. They're just as good as the ones they used
before.
ptooner
"Larry" <larryin...@aol.composer> wrote in message
> >From: "ptooner"
>
> >He said "No yamaha actions are made in
> >China."
>
>
> I stood there in the factory in Thomaston and watched them take the
Chinese
> actions, fully assembled, out of the cardboard cartons. I saw the Chinese
> writing all over the boxes, and I saw the Chinese writing on the hang tags
each
> one had attached to it. I spoke to the management member regarding the
actions,
> and he had no issue about admitting that *all* the actions used in the
> Thomaston assembled pianos are built in China.
I just threw in what he said, I didn't doubt the china connection either.
In fairness I should point out, however, that chinese and japanese writing
is identical. In Japanese it is called Kanji, but in both cases it is a
pictorgraphic type writing not related to the word but the concept. It is
interesting (to me at least) that while a Chinese, a Japanese, and a Korean
could not converse they could write notes to each other.
Gerry
Christof Pflumm
> In fairness I should point out, however, that chinese and japanese writing
> is identical.
If I'm correctly informed, that's not true. Japanese has three sets of
"letters", two of them consisting of symbols for syllables, the other
consisting of Kanjis. The syllable symbols don't look as complicated
as the kanjis. The japanese Kanjis (at least a lot of them) are the
same symbols as in chinese, but they have different meanings.
Christof
Mitch I.
Japanese uses a mixture of kanji and simplified characters (hiragana and
katakana) that are not pictogragrams but syllables, and Korean uses mostly
Korean characters (composites of very simple elements), with just a few
kanjis. When I ask a Japanese person to read Chinese, I always get the same
answer: "I can read most of the characters, but it doesn't make much sense."
Mitch I.
Radu Focshaner
"Christof Pflumm" <lti...@ltilx92.etec.uni-karlsruhe.de> wrote in message
news:tpsmhoj...@ltilx92.etec.uni-> If I'm correctly informed, that's not
true. Japanese has three sets of
> "letters", two of them consisting of symbols for syllables, the other
> consisting of Kanjis. The syllable symbols don't look as complicated
> as the kanjis. The japanese Kanjis (at least a lot of them) are the
> same symbols as in chinese, but they have different meanings.
Long ago in a distant land, I, Radu, the shape shifting master of darkness,
unleashed an unspeakable evil. But a foolish samurai warrior, Christof,
wielding a magic sword stepped forth to oppose me. Before the final blow was
struck, I tore open a portal in time, and flung him into the future where my
evil is law. Now the fool seeks to return to the past and undo the future
that is radu.
ptooner
I believe you are incorrectly informed. It is true that there are three
forms of writing in Japanese; katakana, hiragana, and kanji. The first two
are phonetic types that are used in hand writing but much less often in
signs or formal print. Because Kanji is totally independent of a spoken
language but identifies an idea or a concept it is identical in each
language that uses it. There may of course be a few modern additions, but
generally they are all the same. To illustrate (as well as I can here)
there is a symbol that conveys the idea "woman". It doesn't matter what the
spoken language is, there is always a concept of female human being. There
is another symbol that indicates "roof", again a universal concept. If you
combine these two ideas, that is a woman under a roof, you have the symbol
for "peace" in Japanese at least. I suspect that tells us something about
the oriental way of thinking.
Gerry
Chris Aher
for "trouble" is TWO women under a roof.
Regards,
Chris
"ptooner" <no...@yourlife.com> wrote in message
news:t3RUb.20818$CJ1.432@lakeread01...
H. Emmerson Meyers
years ago I played a Walter vertical and then a comprably sized Yamaha
vertical (I don't recall the heights). Both were new and sold in the same
store. I can't say that I noticed an appreciable difference in touch and
tone between the two brands or that in terms of touch or tone I would
necessarily prefer one over the other. This may have been because they were
small to medium size verticals which I don't particularly care to play
anyway. I see much more pronounced differences between the tall verticals
and grands.
"Larry" <larryin...@aol.composer> wrote in message
news:20040205194932...@mb-m06.aol.com...
John Inzer
> It is interesting (to me at least) that while a
> Chinese, a Japanese, and a Korean could
> not converse they could write notes to each
> other.
Sounds like the same problem that affects
married couples.
--
John Inzer
return e-mail disabled
ptooner
"Chris Aher" <ca...@enk.net> wrote in message
news:c010o9$10kopg$1...@ID-75854.news.uni-berlin.de...
> From the dim past, I seem to recall (possible incorrectly) that the
ideogram
> for "trouble" is TWO women under a roof.
>
> Regards,
> Chris
>
And THAT tells us something about how YOU think! :-)
Gerry
Dan
found the Yamaha's unbearably bright, while the Walter was the best upright
I played.
Dan
H. Emmerson Meyers <vkr...@starpower.net> wrote:
: While I have no reason to doubt Larry's fine analysis I will say this. A few
--
Dave Tempo
"Larry" <larryin...@aol.composer> wrote in message
> >From: "Rick Hollett"
>
> >Not to be nitpicky Larry, but if you have such a low opinion of the
Yamaha,
> >why recommend it as a starter piano? Isn't there a better choice?
>
> Well, yes there is, for a starter piano. Yamaha's low end stuff is made in
> either China or Georgia, all of it simply a tradeoff on the name
recognition.
I know you hate Yamaha's Larry, but seriously - comparing the Chinese pianos
to the Thomaston pianos? The low end pianos are made in China - the home
models for their "mid" level stuff sold in the US is made in Ga. I would
assume the actions are coming from China for those pianos now which
certainly doesn't excite me but the pianos out of Ga can't be considered
bottom tier. I have one of the Ga. pianos with the Jap action and it's a
great starter and mid performance piano for that matter. Kinda like buying
a Toyota Camery vs a Lincoln Town Car (Walters). Ok, maybe not the best
analogy. As long as you're not buying the M400 stuff which is POS material
I think you're fine with the pianos out of Ga.
Dave Tempo
> As a sidebar, I suppose, I called the only Yamaha dealer anywhere around
the
> DC area yesterday, Oren music. They have about 8 or 10 stores but all
under
> the same company. Anyway, I asked the salesman specifically whether the
> action on the P22 was made in China. I told him I knew that some actions
> were, but I didn't know specifically about that one. He told me quite
> emphatically that the "insides" (strung back?) were made in Japan and the
> cases were made in Thomaston Ga. He said "No yamaha actions are made in
> China."
> Gerry
This is an ignorant salesperson then (imagine that). What's the "insides"?
As to your comment - the strung back is assembled in GA. The plates and the
actions are the only things fabricated outside the Thomaston facility.
Dave Tempo
"Larry" <larryin...@aol.composer> wrote in message
> If you looked at the action in the P22, you'd see the aluminum rails
instead of
> the heavy hard maplewood rail in the Walter, which also has a piece of
cast
> angle iron imbedded in it for heavy duty stability. You'd have noticed the
> plastic action parts in the Yamaha vertical, as opposed to the wooden
parts in
> the Walter.
I agree with a lot of your assessments on the wood quality - when you build
100 pianos to 1 you have to use less quality materials. However, if you
really keep your eyes peeled you can find tighter grained soundboards in
P22's and the like. It took looking at several dozen M500's before I found
the one I wanted, but I knew what I was looking for.
As far as the plastic - we all know that plastic in the 50's/60's was not a
good idea in piano construction. I think the "plastic" you keep refering to
is actually ABS (whatever that stands for) which is indeed a synthetic
substance, but certainly not uncommon or of lesser quality than a similar
wood part. No drawbacks that I can think of here - a plus on the jack is
the pin tolerances don't change and you don't need to regraphite the tops if
they start hanging up.
The aluminum rail is the same way - the only drawback here is it is more
difficult from a service standpoint than a wood rail. But then again, it's
not going to change in tolerances either - a rock maple rail can based on
the quality of the wood and the care that was taken in fabricating the part.
I won't argue that a Walters is a fine piano, but I also won't dismiss
Yamaha out of hand. Then again, I would expect the Yamaha to cost less too.
Larry
>As far as the plastic - we all know that plastic in the 50's/60's was not a
>good idea in piano construction. I think the "plastic" you keep refering to
>is actually ABS
You're correct, and it doesn't mean there's anything wrong with the Yamaha.
Remember, my intent was to show all the points where the Walter and the Yamaha
differed, to show the Yamaha salesman that trashed the Walter for what he was -
and to toss a little of it back at him. The plastic parts were the weakest of
the points I made. There's nothing wrong with them.
>I won't argue that a Walters is a fine piano, but I also won't dismiss
>Yamaha out of hand. Then again, I would expect the Yamaha to cost less too.
I agree. They are both good pianos, just in different categories. I do think
the Yamahas are a bit overpriced compared to other pianos it competes against,
and I think the Walter is underpriced compared to what it competes against. But
as an entry to midlevel quality piano, the Thomaston Yamahas are just fine. The
Walter is not an entry or midlevel piano however.
Tom Shaw
The appearance of the grain of the spruce top of a guitar has long been a
quick way to judge the quality. Straight thin grain evenly spaced is the
ticket. Check out the top of a top of the line Martin and see. At least I
hope Martin is still doing the job right...good wood is getting scarcer and
scarcer.
TS
"drsmith" <drsm...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c004av$pb$1...@pyrite.mv.net...
Marc Sabatella
Yamaha
> salesman who misinformed the customer by claiming the Walter was all
looks no
> substance.
As a debating tactic, this can be sound, but then, it would usually be
preceded by something along the lines of, "how would you like it if I
said...", and then made the final conclusion that both sets of
statements were worthless in actually evaluating pianos. Perhaps then
followed by an actual objective analysis of the playing properties of
the pianos, if you wanted to actually contribute something on behalf of
Walter.
> As to "cheap veneer" - yes, all pianos use veneer. But if you look at
the
> veneer on a Walter and compare it to the veneer on the Yamaha M series
for
> example, you'll find the veneer on the Yamaha is paper thin, while the
Walter
> uses high quality veneers.
Yes, but you've yet to suggest how this is actually relevant. That is,
which does the thicker veneer improve - the action or the sound?
> I know it doesn't matter if a piano is finished on the inside - but I
think it
> should be fairly obvious that if one piano does and one doesn't, it
isn't the
> lower quality one that is doing it.
I wouldn't think that at all. Given a choice between two pianos of
comparable price, a natural assumption would be that the one that spent
more money on the stuff that *doesn't* matter must have spent
correspondingly less on the stuff that *does*.
I'm also curious about your brush-off of the claim about Walter using
Home Depot screws. You didn't actually answer this expect to ridicule
the suggestion. Is it that you believe the claim is false, or that you
believe the source of the screws to be irrelevant? If the former, why
should I disbelieve this claim made by the Yamaha sales but believe your
claims about Yamaha? If the latter, why should I assume screw quality
is less important than veneer thickness?
> I suppose you'd have
> preferred that I *not* present the facts about how the Yamaha is made?
I'd have preferred you not do so in such an obviously biased way.
Virtually nothing you said about Yamahas in any way suggests to me that
the pianos would either sound or play worse than a Walter - all you've
done is demonstrate that, with respect to the specific aspects you
mentioned, the Walter is better as furtniture.
Now, I say this as someone who has played a few Walters uprights, but no
grands. Their uprights didn't impress me particularly at all in
playability or sound - I found the dynamic range in particular
disappointing for a piano of the sizes I was testing - but then, I'm no
fan of Yamaha uprights, either.
Marc Sabatella
I
> found the Yamaha's unbearably bright, while the Walter was the best
upright
> I played.
I would certainly agree that many Yamaha uprights are extremely bright,
and the Walters I've played were anything but. One reason i said I was
more or less equally unimpressed with both is that I prefer a sound more
or less half way between those extremes, at least for home purposes.
For performance purposes, i prefer an instrument to be on the bright
side. Of course, how the hammers are voiced can affect this quite a
bit.
Larry
>a debating tactic, this can be sound, but then, it would usually be
>preceded by something along the lines of...........>Perhaps then
>followed by an actual objective analysis of the playing properties of
>the pianos, if you wanted to actually contribute something on behalf of
>Walter.
>Yes, but you've yet to suggest how this is actually relevant. That is,
>which does the thicker veneer improve - the action or the sound?
Are you really this freaking stupid?
Geez......
>I wouldn't think that at all. Given a choice between two pianos of
>comparable price, a natural assumption would be that the one that spent
>more money on the stuff that *doesn't* matter must have spent
>correspondingly less on the stuff that *does*.
If you knew anything about pianos, you'd know we aren't talking about two
pianos of comparable price. Either you're arguing just for the sake of arguing,
or you're about as dense as concrete.
>I'm also curious about your brush-off of the claim about Walter using
>Home Depot screws. You didn't actually answer this expect to ridicule
>the suggestion. Is it that you believe the claim is false, or that you
>believe the source of the screws to be irrelevant?
See what I mean?....... sheesh..... I didn't "brush off" the claim about the
screws dude, I assumed (apparently incorrectly) that my post was being read by
people with more than a 3rd grade education. Only an idiot would think that a
piano manufacturer was buying his supplies at Home Depot. And only an idiot
would think that even an entry level piano maker would switch from one type
screw to the other right in the middle of a piano. I was relating a story that
showed how ridiculous some salesmen will get in an effort to knock their
competition.
Please tell me that you simply can't stand me and are trying to irritate me on
purpose - for I don't think I could sleep nights knowing someone was walking
around free who wasn't capable of reasoning that one out......
>If the latter, why should I assume screw quality
>is less important than veneer thickness?
Nope....... you *are* stupid, huh?.....
Let me try again, and if you don't get it this time, what say you and I just
shut the hell up and let it rest, ok? No, veneer thickness doesn't affect the
tone of the piano. But no, it isn't just a furniture thing either. It makes a
statement about the manufacturer's philosophy of quality. Paper thin veneer is
just fine for cheap stuff. I suppose you bought your TV stand at Walmart, one
of those put it together yourself things made of fiber panels with a plastic
woodgrain glued over it. If that's all it takes to satisfy you, no problem. I
happen to have a bit higher standards than that. My TV cabinet is made of solid
oak, hand sanded, with a handrubbed lacquer finish on it. To each his own. A
piano with cheap thin veneer over particleboard is an indicator that the
manufacturer cut every corner he could. A high quality veneer over solid
woodcore is a good indicator that the manufacturer is building a higher quality
instrument than the particleboard/thin veneer maker. Contrary to your
ridiculous logic, what you'll find is that if the outsides are cheap, so are
the insides. If the outsides are high quality, so are the insides.
>> I suppose you'd have
>> preferred that I *not* present the facts about how the Yamaha is made?
>
>I'd have preferred you not do so in such an obviously biased way.
>Virtually nothing you said about Yamahas in any way suggests to me
At this point I don't give a rat's ass *what* it suggests to you. You obviously
aren't able to follow the simple logic of what I was saying. I presented
factual information about the construction and material quality of the two
pianos, and invited people to go look for themselves. The object was to show
them what to look for. Now - until you go look at the things I pointed out, all
you are doing is jerking off verbally. Do it on your own time.
>all you've
>done is demonstrate that, with respect to the specific aspects you
>mentioned, the Walter is better as furtniture.
No, I've also demonstrated that there are people out there who are dumber than
a box of hair.
ptooner
"Larry" <larryin...@aol.composer> wrote in message
What's a TV cabinet?
Gerry
Larry
>What's a TV cabinet?
It was easier than typing entertainment center..... ;-)
Mike Williams
> What's a TV cabinet?
It's a parliamentary ruling body composed of cross-dressers.
ptooner
"Larry" <larryin...@aol.composer> wrote in message
> >From: "ptooner"
>
> >What's a TV cabinet?
>
>
> It was easier than typing entertainment center..... ;-)
>
>
> Larry
I thought an entertainment center was a piano?? ;=)
Gerry
ptooner
"Mike Williams" <mike@nospam4me> wrote in message
news:4027953d$0$29129$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
> ptooner wrote:
> > What's a TV cabinet?
>
> It's a parliamentary ruling body composed of cross-dressers.
>
>
Gerry
Chris Aher
Regards,
Chris
"ptooner" <no...@yourlife.com> wrote in message
news:tcWUb.22547$CJ1.8440@lakeread01...
Chris Aher
"Chris Aher" <ca...@enk.net> wrote in message
news:c089oa$134dg0$1...@ID-75854.news.uni-berlin.de...
drsmith
>>couldn't agree with what was said.
>
>the comparison. That's like saying you couldn't find a concert grand to listen
>to, but you played a baby grand, and you just can't agree that a difference
>exists.
>
>> I just wanted to offer my
>>observations as well, and if I were willing to take the salesman at face
>>value, I certainly wouldn't be reading this group.
>
>mind - you are operating from the viewpoint that I am telling you the Yamaha
>isn't a good piano, and you are telling me you can't see the differences
>between two pianos after only having seen one of them. I am *not* saying the
>Yamaha is a bad piano. Of course it isn't. This started with a story about a
>Yamaha salesman dismissing the Walter as an inferior piano to the Walter, in
>fact inferior to just about any piano, when you get right down to it. I was not
>saying the Yamaha was a bad piano, I was telling those who aren't technicians
>what to look for between the two to find the differences between them, and why
>the Walter was superior. It *is* superior to the Yamaha, but that doesn't mean
>the Yamaha isn't a good piano. It just doesn't follow that one has to be
The problem with this argument is that you pointed out *SPECIFIC* flaws in
the Yamaha that required NO comparison with a Walter. Those flaws were
not present in the model I inspected. Case closed.
You can go on and on all you want about how superior you think you are at
inpsecting an instrument, but the truth of the matter is you don't know
what my background/education/experience level is. I may be just as
qualified as you to inspect woodgrain or other pieces of the whole, but
instead you spent something like 200+ lines insulting me directly(or at
least discrediting me when I in fact don't need to see a Walter to know
that the flaws mentioned weren't present). I'm absolutely sure of one
thing, now - you have nothing constructive to offer to the group and
you're more interested in settling some old vendetta against a salesman
than offering objective advice.
See ya later.
Larry
>I thought an entertainment center was a piano?? ;=)
Yeah, it is... I couldn't come up with a clever answer..... wish I'd thought of
that transvestite line..... that was funny!
Larry
>The problem with this argument is that you pointed out *SPECIFIC* flaws in
>the Yamaha that required NO comparison with a Walter. Those flaws were
>not present in the model I inspected. Case closed.
In order to see the difference, you have to see them both.
>You can go on and on all you want about how superior you think you are at
>inpsecting an instrument, but the truth of the matter is you don't know
>what my background/education/experience level is.
Now do I give a shit.
>I may be just as
>qualified as you to inspect woodgrain or other pieces of the whole, but
>instead you spent something like 200+ lines insulting me directly(or at
>least discrediting me when I in fact don't need to see a Walter to know.....
I wasn't trying to discredit you at all. I simply said that until you see both
of them, you don't have any standard by which you can make a decision. That's
why they call it "comparing", hotrod.
>I'm absolutely sure of one
>thing, now - you have nothing constructive to offer to the group and
>you're more interested in settling some old vendetta against a salesman
>than offering objective advice.
Now see, that's just plain dumb. You miss the entire point, you try to make a
comparison by looking at only one side, and then you get your panties in a wad
because you don't like what I had to say. So you attack me by telling me I have
"nothing constructive to offer this group". I'll have you know that I have been
offering constructive help and advice to this group for years before you ever
hit town. I'm known for not putting up with any bullshit. What you don't seem
to have the good sense to see is that I was not attacking Yamaha, nor do I have
an old "vendetta" against a salesman. I don't even know who the salesman is. I
was attacking his slimy sales tactics.
*You* may not have the sense to understand it, but most people did. Most people
were smart enough to see what I was doing. A lot of people read these threads
who are shopping for a piano. By Gobs now they know that the salesman was a
slimeball sales weasel, and that his story was a load of crap. They also know
how to make a comparison between the two pianos. My guess is you're a Yamaha
sales weasel who got his toes stepped on.
>See ya later.
Kiss my ass.
Tom Shaw
Your characterization of Larry is wrong and spiteful. Also you are full of
shit.news:c08csb$op4$1...@pyrite.mv.net...
Larry
>drsmith,
>Your characterization of Larry is wrong and spiteful. Also you are full of
>shit.
>TS
Thank you Mr. Shaw. You are a gentleman and a scholar. ;-)
Marc Sabatella
> >Yes, but you've yet to suggest how this is actually relevant. That
is,
> >which does the thicker veneer improve - the action or the sound?
>
> Are you really this freaking stupid?
I assume, then, you are resorting to insults to cover the fact that the
answer to the question does not support your argument that Walter pianos
are superior to Yamaha pianos in any way that actually matters. This
was, of course, the answer I assumed to be true all along, but since you
made such a
big deal about it, I was giving you the benefit of the doubt and
supposed for a moment there might have actually been something
substantive in your attack on Yamaha. I see now I was incorrect - your
rant was just as insubstantive as it looked on first sight.
> >I wouldn't think that at all. Given a choice between two pianos of
> >comparable price, a natural assumption would be that the one that
spent
> >more money on the stuff that *doesn't* matter must have spent
> >correspondingly less on the stuff that *does*.
>
> If you knew anything about pianos, you'd know we aren't talking about
two
> pianos of comparable price.
I wasn't aware we were talking about two specific pianos; both Walter
and Yamaha produce a whole line of them. But in any case, I was
referring to your implication cabinet quality was a reliable indicator
of overall quality. While you are of course right in some cases, it's
clearly not going to be true in all, and in particular, it's going to
fail when you do compare pianos of the same price.
> Only an idiot would think
that a
> piano manufacturer was buying his supplies at Home Depot.
I didn't *think* that; I *asked* if you had a rational response to the
accusation. Given the way you resort to personal attacks when you don't
have any facts to actually support your argument, I saw no reason to
assume your failure to answer this time was anything but more of the
same.
Although I'll give you this - FWIW, I don't see what would be so bad
about buying a screw at Home Depot that I should automatically assume
the claim was a lie. That is, the possiblity of Walter using Home Depot
screws seems no more outrageous than the possiblity that the Yamaha
salesman
would have just made that up. Or even the possibility that someone just
made up the story about the Yamaha salesman saying that in the first
place. Actually, the latter seems the most plausible to me.
> Please tell me that you simply can't stand me and are trying to
irritate me on
> purpose
I am trying to engage you in rational discussion; I am sorry if this
irritates you. Apparently, you prefer ad hominem attacks and irrelevant
rants. I will try to keep this in mind.
> Let me try again, and if you don't get it this time, what say you and
I just
> shut the hell up and let it rest, ok? No, veneer thickness doesn't
affect the
> tone of the piano. But no, it isn't just a furniture thing either. It
makes a
> statement about the manufacturer's philosophy of quality.
> ...
> Contrary to your
> ridiculous logic, what you'll find is that if the outsides are cheap,
so are
> the insides. If the outsides are high quality, so are the insides.
Sometimes. There is nothing ridiculous about my logic, though - given a
fixed budget, money spent on the cabinet is money that could have been
spent on stuff that matters.
Oh yeah, I'm sorry - so as not to irritate you with too much
rationality, let me amend that:
Money spent on the cabinet is money that could have been spent on stuff
that matters, you arrogant prick.
Better?
> You obviously
> aren't able to follow the simple logic of what I was saying.
I followed it just fine; it just didn't lead anywhere, dumbass.
Anyhow, since you are obviously more interested in insults than rational
discussion, you will hear no more from me. But consider - your attitude
has left me, and probably many others, with a very bad feeling regarding
Walter pianos. You might not actually work for Walter, but you couldn't
have done a better job of biasing me against their pianos than if you
worked for Yamaha. Insulting the potential customer, trashing the
competition, making illogical arguments that don't address any
substantial differences between brands - if this is those associated
with Walter do business, I'll take mine elsewhere.
Larry
>I assume, then, you are resorting to insults to cover the fact that the
>answer to the question does not support your argument that Walter pianos
>are superior to Yamaha pianos in any way that actually matters.
Nah - I'm resorting to insults because that's what I do when I figure out I'm
talking to a moron and realize that plain common sense isn't going to be a part
of their contribution.
>This was, of course, the answer I assumed to be true all along
So you *knew* you were a moron....
>might have actually been something
>substantive in your attack on Yamaha.
I didn't attack Yamaha you idiot. You just apparently aren't smart enough to
figure out what I *did* do.
>I wasn't aware we were talking about two specific pianos; both Walter
>and Yamaha produce a whole line of them.
Well, pay attention next time.
>But in any case, I was
>referring to your implication cabinet quality was a reliable indicator
>of overall quality. While you are of course right in some cases, it's
>clearly not going to be true in all, and in particular, it's going to
>fail when you do compare pianos of the same price.
Well finally a little light seeped into your dull brain..... we weren't talking
about pianos of the same price. You just went off on some wild tangent on your
own, without knowing what the hell was being discussed.
>I didn't *think* that; I *asked* if you had a rational response to the
>accusation.
Think of the cheapest, cheesiest, poorest quality piano you've ever seen. Even
*they* didn't run down to the local hardware store to buy parts. I guess the
answer was so obvious that I just assumed you understood that getting parts at
Home Depot wasn't the issue, the issue was that a salesman would stoop so low
as to say such a thing to a customer.
>Given the way you resort to personal attacks when you don't
>have any facts to actually support your argument,
Again, it isn't that I had a lack of facts, it was that you missed every one of
them while arguing about stupid stuff.
>Although I'll give you this - FWIW, I don't see what would be so bad
>about buying a screw at Home Depot that I should automatically assume
>the claim was a lie. That is, the possiblity of Walter using Home Depot
>screws seems no more outrageous than the possiblity that the Yamaha
>salesman would have just made that up.
Well, there you go. What's the use trying to explain anything to someone who
can't see something this obvious?
>I am trying to engage you in rational discussion;
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!
OK, you got me. You're right. You can't judge the quality on the inside by
looking at the quality on the outside - I lied. I made it all up. It all seemed
so logical that I thought I could pull the wool over everyone's eyes. But not
you!! Not old deadeye Marc!! No sir!!!! Why..... just look at all those piano
cases on Steinway, Mason Hamlin, Bosendorfer, Bechstein, Bluthner, Walter....
the *nerve* of those people using that tacky heavy veneer!! The *nerve* of
those people gluing the veneer to solid hardwood!! Don't they know the best
way is to use flakeboard and paperthin veneer on the outside so they can put
the money on the *inside*, like those wonderful folks at Pearl River, Dong
Bhei, Samick, Young Chang, and of course.... Yamaha?
You caught me red handed Marc, trying to con people into buying real wood. I
should be ashamed.......
>Sometimes. There is nothing ridiculous about my logic, though - given a
>fixed budget, money spent on the cabinet is money that could have been
>spent on stuff that matters.
>
In theory, you are correct. The problem is I don't work with theory. I work
with 32 years worth of fact. And with pianos, it just doesn't work that way.
There is not a single piano made where the case is built of high quality
materials to hide a cheap piano, or vice versa. Not one.
>Money spent on the cabinet is money that could have been spent on stuff
>that matters, you arrogant prick.
Well, let me amend mine: Not one, you pencil dicked geek.
>Better?
Much.
>I followed it just fine; it just didn't lead anywhere, dumbass.
That's because you don't know where you're going, dickwad.
Better?
>But consider - your attitude
>has left me, and probably many others, with a very bad feeling
I don't really care what kind of feeling it left you with. Most people
understood from the getgo that I was exposing the Yamaha salesman's lies as
ridiculous by showing people how to compare the two, and was helping people see
how salesmen can con you. I was also trying to clear the issue up for the guy
who was doing the shopping that the salesman told this to. Instead of getting
your panties in a wad because you thought I was trying to knock Yamahas, you
should have taken the time to see that all I was doing was tossing the rock the
Yamaha salesman tossed back in his lap, and trying to help others see the
facts. My conversations with you ever since has been me trying to straighten
out your warped understanding of the whole thing. I doubt very seriously you
would ever have been a Walter customer anyway, because you obviously want a
piano with a cheap case on it because to you that means the insides are better.
To others, I simply suggest they read this thread from the first post straight
through, and after they finish they'll understand why I got tired of fooling
with you. You're simply not very smart - not an attack, just a statement of my
opinion of you.
>Insulting the potential customer, trashing the
>competition, making illogical arguments that don't address any
>substantial differences between brands
See what I mean? The Yamaha salesman did the trashing. And anyone who takes the
list of things I told them to compare and actually does the comparison will see
that I in fact addressed a whole slew of extremely substantial differences
between the brands. That, and your own admission that you haven't even seen a
Walter piano, should clear up any doubts they have about which of us is being
unreasonable.
Besides, I remember you from some time in the past - you weren't very bright
then either if I recall. Same lack of ability to grasp common sense issues.
M. Slater
Any thread can turn into a flame war.
Mark
Chris Aher
piano industry detracts from the serious discussion of Chinese ideograms.
;-)
Regards,
Chris
"M. Slater" <harpsic...@aol.community> wrote in message
news:20040210031332...@mb-m21.aol.com...
drsmith
Larry <larryin...@aol.composer> wrote:
>>From: drsm...@hotmail.com (drsmith)
>
>>The problem with this argument is that you pointed out *SPECIFIC* flaws in
>>the Yamaha that required NO comparison with a Walter. Those flaws were
>>not present in the model I inspected. Case closed.
>
>In order to see the difference, you have to see them both.
>
No I don't. I was never trying to compare these two specific instruments -
you were. I can easily compare the Yamaha to a Steinway or any other
quality instrument that's in this area(which is of course, a matter of
opinion as to what constitutes quality - you may or may not agree that
a $30k Steinway is a quality instrument... whatever.)
>I wasn't trying to discredit you at all. I simply said that until you see both
>of them, you don't have any standard by which you can make a decision. That's
>why they call it "comparing", hotrod.
Ahh, now we're into namecalling - Welcome to the second grade. Also, the
'kiss my ass' comment below clearly proves my point, here. At least stop
hiding behind that keyboard and act like an adult!
>*You* may not have the sense to understand it, but most people did. Most people
>were smart enough to see what I was doing. A lot of people read these threads
>who are shopping for a piano. By Gobs now they know that the salesman was a
>slimeball sales weasel, and that his story was a load of crap. They also know
>how to make a comparison between the two pianos. My guess is you're a Yamaha
>sales weasel who got his toes stepped on.
Nope - I'm just shopping like everyone else. If I had to guess, you work
for Walter, right?
drsmith
Tom Shaw <a000...@airmail.net> wrote:
>drsmith,
>Your characterization of Larry is wrong and spiteful. Also you are full of
>shit.
>TS
I'm not being spiteful or anything like that. I'm also not trying to
create some sort of flamewar. All I did was post what my findings were
and that they didn't agree with Larry. You're all free to disagree
with me if you want - whatever makes you happy.
I'm not going to rehash how we got here - you can use google to to the
review.
Doogle
demonstrated any notable skill in are (1) trashing Yamaha pianos, (2)
trashing other piano salesmen like himself, and (3) trashing other
posters who dare challenge his opinion with vile gutter-language
insults involving genitalia, excreta and/or mental deficiencies. With
respect to the latter, his vocabulary is so extensive I assume he must
have learned it at his mother's knee.
Your mistake in this thread, Marc, was in trying to discuss
higher-level functions such as tone production, musical sound,
technique, beauty, quality, logic. Larry is pre-occupied with
measuring the thickness of small things. I.e., his veneer, wallet,
manhood. You cannot push such a man beyond his limits.
Best regards,
Doogle
larryin...@aol.composer (Larry) wrote in message news:<20040209224358...@mb-m15.aol.com>...
Marc Sabatella
> higher-level functions such as tone production, musical sound,
> technique, beauty, quality, logic. Larry is pre-occupied with
> measuring the thickness of small things. I.e., his veneer, wallet,
> manhood. You cannot push such a man beyond his limits.
Thanks; I see that now. I hadn't seen enough postings by him in the
past - or at least, they had failed to make enough of an impression on
me - to have figured that out before getting into the discussion. Won't
happen again.
Larry
>> Your mistake in this thread, Marc, was in trying to discuss
>> higher-level functions such as tone production, musical sound,
>> technique, beauty, quality, logic. Larry is pre-occupied with
>> measuring the thickness of small things. I.e., his veneer, wallet,
>> manhood. You cannot push such a man beyond his limits.
>
>Thanks; I see that now. I hadn't seen enough postings by him in the
>past - or at least, they had failed to make enough of an impression on
>me - to have figured that out before getting into the discussion. Won't
>happen again.
>
>--------------
>Marc Sabatella
>ma...@outsideshore.com
This is why I don't bother with this newsgroup much any more. I've been around
here for years, and several here know it - far longer than either one of you
worms. Long before either of you wrote your first post, I had long ago
established myself here as a knowledgeable technician who worked hard to help
people who had questions about pianos. Your remark implying that you are the
veteran poster and I'm some new guy makes me and several others here laugh.
I have a reputation for being blunt, and for not having any patience with
unprofessional salesmen and the lies they spread. I also have a reputation for
not putting up with crap from the weasels who try to support them, either
because they have a shared agenda, or as in your cases, they're just plain
stupid. I have forgotten more about pianos than the two of you put together
will ever know.
Just a few years ago this was *the* place for people wanting to learn about
pianos to come for information. There were lots of technicians from all around
the world who posted here, who like me tried to help people. At that time, when
some jerk popped up who thought they knew more than the pros on the board,
there were plenty of us techs who would back up what the other said, and the
reader knew who was full of shit and who knew the facts. Not any more. Now it
is filled with crap about which finger to use to push a key, which set of
headphones to use to play their musical toaster ovens through, and assholes
like you two who combined don't know enough about pianos to put in a thimble.
As it began to be overrun by puffed shirts like you two, it got to the point
that those of us who know pianos and know the piano business couldn't keep up
with all the misinformation. When we tried to help, as I did when I first
posted to this thread, we would get jumped on by someone who should have been
listening and learning instead of trying to take someone else to task because
they didn't like what the experienced person said. So most of us left. Why the
remaining few are still around is beyond me. This isn't where piano information
is being given on the internet anymore, anyway.
I still check in once in awhile, and if I read bad information, or it looks
like I can help, I do. But passed a point, I'm not going to put up with the
pompous assholes like you two. I'm going to entertain myself. I don't have any
patience for fools or idiots, and I don't owe either of you a dime. But don't
get the idea that I'm just some new guy you can attack at will. There are still
enough people here who have seen far better than either of you crash and burn
trying to take me on.
My suggestion - get down off your high horses and get your personal issues out
of the way. You might learn something. If you'd been paying attention instead
of trying to start a fight you'd have learned something already. God knows both
of you need to.
Michael
> Yes, isn't it a pity that Larry's exposure of sleazoid sales tactics in the
> piano industry detracts from the serious discussion of Chinese ideograms.
Some of my friends know people who eat Chinese food and so I know for a
fact Chinese people aren't ideograms at all. Well some of them probably
are, but there are just as many ideograms in other countries.
This sort of thing is typical usenet, you should check your facts before
posting this kind of racial stereotype - have you even been to China?
Can you speak chinese? Can you differentiate triganomic functions on an
abacus? Thought not.
--
Michael.
Larry
>Chris Aher wrote:
>> Yes, isn't it a pity that Larry's exposure of sleazoid sales tactics in the
>> piano industry detracts from the serious discussion of Chinese ideograms.
>
>Some of my friends know people who eat Chinese food and so I know for a
>fact Chinese people aren't ideograms at all. Well some of them probably
>are, but there are just as many ideograms in other countries.
>
>you should check your facts before
>posting this kind of racial stereotype - have you even been to China?
>Can you speak chinese?
Geez.....
I'm starting to see a pattern develop Chris...... somewhere there's a nuthouse
where the inmates have overpowered the computer room.......
Chris Aher
anal orifice that Usenet and other internet forums, to paraphrase Arlo
Guthrie, encourages their basic nature to "grow and develop and take a
meaningful shape in today's complex society."
I'm not convinced that our friend Michael falls into this catagory. He may
just have an oddball sense of humor, sort of reminiscent of our old friend
Mbuto M'babwe(AKA Lily), although his messages seem to originate in the UK
and not in "Tierra del Fuego".
Several points of information:
1. The Chinese ideogram for "trouble" is, in fact a symbolic representation
of two women under a roof. It is also in a different context the ideogram
for "hemp" Go figure.
2. I haven't been to China but may have to go sometime this year on
business. I may also have to go to India. I have been to Japan. Anyone who
thinks China is a backward country is very ill-informed. (or out of their
mind) Those folks are on the move for sure. It looks like they are already
starting to eat Yamaha's lunch in the piano business.
3. Although I'm a bit rusty these days, I can differentiate the trig
functions and I don't need an abacus to do it. I once saw (many years ago
at a demonstration set up by a math teacher) someone very skilled with an
abacus beat a person with an old fashion adding machine at basic arithmetic
operations.
4. As a former piano technician (changed careers 20 years ago), it is my
observation that Larry's postings over the last five years, although
opiniated, have demonstrated an in depth knowlege of both the technical and
business sides of the piano industry, and a great willingness to share that
knowlege to assist folks in navigating the archane process of acquiring a
decent instrument without being taken advantage of by the preponderance of
slimeballs involved in piano sales. Although he and I may occasionally
disagree on a technical detail here or there, I share his disgust at the
dishonest business practices of that type of dealer/salesperson. I've
noticed that the type of individual described in the first paragraph often
likes to pick a fight with Larry (and his analogs in other subject forums)
For instance, in the fencing world, these types often flame Eric D. an
"A" ranked foil fencer and top rated referee on his (correct) interpretation
of the rules. To quote Robert Heinlein, "Because they can't fly, they
delight in trying to clip the wings of those who can."
Regards,
Chris
"Larry" <larryin...@aol.composer> wrote in message
news:20040211081304...@mb-m04.aol.com...
Tom Shaw
TSnews:c0dk9p$15gtu9$1...@ID-75854.news.uni-berlin.de...
Al Stevens
Marc, and he's a good one. A damn good one. I don't know doodly about the
insides, and I don't know or care how much Marc knows either. I also don't
know how well Larry plays piano if at all, and I don't really care. I would
care if I had to listen to him play, but I haven't had that pleasure. Those
who defend his contributions to this group are right. Those who say he
always insults people who disagree with him are wrong. I have disagreed with
him in the past and he has responded respectfully. I don't know exactly what
lights his fuse, but somehow I have managed to avoid doing it. But if I did,
I think I could handle it.
Similarly Marc and I have had civil disagreements in the past. Gee, maybe
it's just me. :-)
But what does Marc know about pianos? He knows how to play one. At least.
Without guys like him, we wouldn't need those other guys who know all about
the insides.
"What we have here is failure to communicate." There is often a conflict
between two disciplines that are related but polarized. The technician and
the user often disagree. I don't care much about veneers and screws and all
that. I do care whether the piano plays well and is in tune. The technician
cares about its maintainability and reliability, I suppose. The teacher
wants one that can sustain juvenile assaults from peanut butter and jelly.
The salesman cares about whether he can sell it. The club owner wants one
that doesn't cost much, is pretty, and never needs expensive attention. The
patron wants organic muzak so he can hit on the babes at the bar. Everyone
wants something different from a piano, it seems.
I have firm opinions about some brands based on extensive personal
experience playing them, not looking at or inside them. I own a Walnut C3
that I bought new 23 years ago. It is a great piano. Deprecate its tone, its
veneer, or what kind of wood is in there, and I will probably ignore you. It
plays well, holds its tune and still looks good in our living room. I don't
care if it's made of paper mache, held together with chewing gum and has
rubber bands for strings. I say these ridiculous things to point out that
you guys are arguing from distinct perspectives, all of which are valid.
The invective is another matter. Anyone who can't take that kind of heat
needs to find themselves another Internet.
Yamahas? I am rarely unhappy with Yamahas I play in clubs, convention
centers, restaurants, and so on. They seem to hold up well if the owner
maintains them. I have really liked the few Charles Walters I've played and
most of the Kawais. I have mostly hated every Young Chang and Samick I have
played. They are pieces of crap. Steinways? You never know until you play
it. Either wonderful or unremarkable.
I have been a professional pianist for almost 50 years, have played a hell
of a lot of pianos, am qualified to form and express such opinions, and
don't give a big rat's ass who disagrees.
I have never repaired or tuned an acoustic piano nor do I ever intend to.
Does that mean Larry has forgotten more about pianos than I'll ever know? It
depends on your perspective. It depends on what I know. It depends on what
he's forgotten. How does he know he's forgotten it if he's forgotten it?
"Don't we need someone who *remembers* all this stuff?" (Jay Leno) (Sorry,
Larry, couldn't resist.)
But all that does not address Larry's original point, which was that a
salesman was using misinformation to promote a sale rather than to educate
the consumer. An educated consumer is not the salesman's best friend. Anyone
who has strolled into any mall piano store in this great land has probably
experienced what Larry takes issue with, whether they realize it or not. I
have forgotten how this thread lost that original point.
Re: The much maligned digital: Badly built or badly maintained acoustic
pianos have made me come to love my digital pianos. They've reached a point
where they are good musical instruments in their own right. You can dismiss
them as being impure, I suppose, and I can understand that, but my studio
and gig digitals have made things possible that I could not otherwise do,
include earn money at some venues, and for that I love them. And anyone who
doesn't like that can, well, just not like it.
Al Stevens
http://www.alstevens.com
Tom Shaw
TS
"Al Stevens" <nob...@home.com> wrote in message
news:aOuWb.148339$rj7.9...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
Mobutu Mbwawe
Chris Aher wrote:
> There is a certain class of person generally known as a rapidly oxidizing
> anal orifice that Usenet and other internet forums, to paraphrase Arlo
> Guthrie, encourages their basic nature to "grow and develop and take a
> meaningful shape in today's complex society."
>
> I'm not convinced that our friend Michael falls into this catagory. He may
> just have an oddball sense of humor, sort of reminiscent of our old friend
> Mbuto M'babwe(AKA Lily), although his messages seem to originate in the UK
> and not in "Tierra del Fuego".
Lily ? Now I'm a rapidly oxidizing anal orifice ? Thanks, great Master !
Mobutu Mbwawe , Congo, Brazaville
Larry
>lights his fuse, but somehow I have managed to avoid doing it. But if I did,
>I think I could handle it.
I know you could, Al. But I just don't see you ever having to....:-)
>But all that does not address Larry's original point, which was that a
>salesman was using misinformation to promote a sale rather than to educate
>the consumer. An educated consumer is not the salesman's best friend. Anyone
who has strolled into any mall piano store in this great land has probably
>experienced what Larry takes issue with, whether they realize it or not. I
>have forgotten how this thread lost that original point.
Thank you Al, for your excellent voice of reason. There is not one single point
you made that I disagree with. The original point getting lost was one of my
main frustrations with those I blasted. Thank you for pointing it out, and that
it had gotten lost.
You're a gentleman and a scholar.....
(now...... how did you want the check made out?........ ;-) )
Doogle
> This is why I don't bother with this newsgroup much any more. I've been around
> here for years, and several here know it - far longer than either one of you
> worms. Long before either of you wrote your first post, I had long ago
> established myself here as a knowledgeable technician who worked hard to help
> people who had questions about pianos. Your remark implying that you are the
> veteran poster and I'm some new guy makes me and several others here laugh.
Laugh long and hard if you want, Larry. I was a regular at RMMP long
before you made your first appearance in the late 90s as a
self-appointed "expert" on everything from absolute pitch to Japanese
manufacturing methods. My enthusiasm waned largely because I found
your long-winded, self-congratulatory, ill-informed, abrasive posts
insufferable. Perhaps no one ever told you this, but the newsgroup
took a huge hit when you started posting. Your crude language and
abusive bullying quickly turned a civilized forum into an unpleasant
battlefield. Quite a few talented and sensitive pianists and teachers
departed, but I'm sure you never noticed. When I came back to visit
in 2003 after a long hiatus, I was appalled to find you still here
trying to dominate the group with crude insults and inane
pontificating. Alas, you haven't changed a bit.
> I have a reputation for being blunt...[snip]
Let's just say you have a reputation. The nature of that reputation
is debatable.
> Just a few years ago this was *the* place for people wanting to learn about
> pianos to come for information. There were lots of technicians from all around
> the world who posted here, who like me tried to help people.... Not any more. >Now it
> is filled with crap about which finger to use to push a key, which set of
> headphones to use to play their musical toaster ovens through ....
> As it began to be overrun by puffed shirts like you two, it got to the point
> that those of us who know pianos and know the piano business couldn't keep up
> with all the misinformation.
Buy some reading glasses, Larry. In all those years you should have
noticed the name of the newsgroup is music.makers.piano. Not
piano.merchant.blowhards or yamaha.salesmen.suck.
Discussing which finger to use on a key, how to reduce arm tension,
how to pick a good piece for a recital, how to improve sight-reading
skills -- these things are not "crap," they are about making music.
Somehow despite all your years in the piano business, Larry, you seem
to have lost sight of what pianos are for.
Here's a challenge: In your next post, write something intelligent
and informative about how to play a piece of piano music. Any piece
of music. Your choice, any style or era you like. Let's see if you
can do it.
> But don't
> get the idea that I'm just some new guy you can attack at will. There are still
> enough people here who have seen far better than either of you crash and burn
> trying to take me on.
Believe it or not, Larry, this newsgroup isn't a game of
King-of-the-Hill.
--Doogle
Larry
>When I came back to visit
>in 2003 after a long hiatus, I was appalled to find you still here
>trying to dominate the group with crude insults and inane
>pontificating. Alas, you haven't changed a bit.
Well, you're entitled to your opinion. But I've always thought you were a jerk
anyway, so your opinion is insignificant to me.
Wayne Fulton
nob...@home.com says...
>Those who say he
>always insults people who disagree with him are wrong. I have disagreed
with
>him in the past and he has responded respectfully. I don't know exactly
what
>lights his fuse, but somehow I have managed to avoid doing it.
I must have missed that one. <g> I will volunteer to be next. If we are
voting, I was one that immediately expected Larry's personal attack when
Marc questioned his rantings. We KNEW what was coming, there was no
other possibility. The old saying about wrestling with pigs was the
first thing that came into mind, but it was too late. There was no
surprise here, no doubt that Larry's personal attack would immediately
follow, with the end of any useful discussion.
If any question, just search http://groups.google.com for:
larryinatlanta idiot|stupid|dumbass|moron|jerk
We can add more words, but that is 534 theads as is. Larry simply enjoys
trashing people. Big man.
Usenet or not, that is systematic unacceptable low class behavior. I can
do without all that trash. Certainly this group is not the place for it.
Larry even somehow imagines in his own mind that this is a virtue and a
public service. He naively calls it "blunt". <LOL> Sorry, not funny
really, pathetic.
It doesnt matter to me what Larry may or may not know about pianos, but
if Larry does have anything to offer, he possibly might gain a better
appearance in moderated forums where there is help to prevent these
problems.
Larry
>If any question, just search http://groups.google.com for:
>
> larryinatlanta idiot|stupid|dumbass|moron|jerk
>
>We can add more words, but that is 534 theads as is. Larry simply enjoys
>trashing people. Big man.
Mr. Fulton, I will respond politely to you. You can read all 534 of those
threads, and you won't find a single one where *I* was the initial attacker.
You apparently think I should just sit there and let others attack and not
respond. That's not how I handle things. Talk in a reasonable manner, I respond
in a reasonable manner.
One thing a lot of people tend to do, and you are one of them, is to skip over
the initial attack and lay the blame on the person that responds to being
attacked. I am *not* the one who initiated the dirt slinging in this thread. My
initial post was in response to the dirty sales tactics of a salesman, to tell
the poster that the salesman was lying, and to show him how to find out the
proof for himself. I was met with not one but THREE individuals who apparently
weren't able to figure out what I was doing, and who attacked me for it,
veering the conversation away from the lies being told by the salesman, and the
help I was offering to sort it out. My "rantings" as you put it, were responses
to their "rantings". Where were you then?
You can call me stupid if you want to, but I happen to know that at least one
of them is a Yamaha salesman. For all I know, so are you.
I do not "enjoy trashing people". But I won't be trashed, either. Most of the
threads you'll pull up where I'm "trashing" people will involve only two or
three people, and those who have been here for any length of time know and
understand what was happening. They have nothing to do with my normal manner of
posting.
I find it interesting that so many people have decided to take me to task for
posting a comparison between two pianos for the purpose of showing the original
poster how to judge the two pianos in spite of the salesman's lies.
If you want to take the time to do a truly *fair* assessment of my posting
history, you will find that 99% of the time I am polite, helpful, and I cut to
the chase when it comes to helping people see through the garbage that passes
for salesmanship in most piano stores today. I joke with people, have a good
time, and there are several people still here who simply don't see me the way
you do. And yes, blunt is a virtue. By blunt, I mean that I say what's on my
mind, you know where I stand, and you know that if you try to slip any sales
crap passed me I'm going to call you on it. I try to help people get facts, not
salesmen's twisted up versions of things.
>if Larry does have anything to offer, he possibly might gain a better
>appearance in moderated forums where there is help to prevent these
>problems.
Like I said, this forum turned to crap a long time ago. I have read the threads
here every day for the last two years, and rarely post anymore, because most of
it has nothing to do with the charter of the newsgroup. Someone said I am wrong
about that, that discussion of playing the piano is the purpose of this forum.
Sorry - it's not. There are other forums for that. This forum is for learning
about the instrument. Now there's nothing wrong with people asking questions
regarding how to play one, but that's not what this forum is for. If you want
to discuss how to play classical music, go to the classical music forum. If you
want to find out which set of headphones to use with your toaster oven, go to
the keyboard forums. If you want to know which finger to use, well..... use the
next one handy.
You want to know what is truly low class, Mr. Fulton? It is piano salesmen
pretending to be unbiased individuals on the forum, giving twisted versions of
the facts to push their own agenda. That sir, is low class.
The discussion of pianos as it relates to consumers with questions on how to
choose them, what to look for, pricing, comparing, all that type thing, has
become irrelevant on this forum, and that is what this forum is supposed to be
primarily engaged in. That type of information is no longer available here in
an honest presentation, with a very few exceptions made for certain posters who
still try to be fair. That kind of information is now found somewhere else. If
you are fortunate enough to find where that is, you will find that I have been
very actively involved in posting there, and you will find that no one there
would agree with your assessment of me. There is no moderator, there are
several well known and highly respected technicians and musicians who post
there, and my contributions are considered worthwhile. Most all of them like me
just fine.
No, I think I've hit a nest of sleasy salesmen who don't like it because I
rattled their cage.
The pig being wrestled here sir, are the sales weasels. If it has come to the
point that people would rather let poor information and blatant lies about
pianos go unchallenged here, then this forum has truly become completely
useless as a source of information regarding pianos. All that's left is to talk
about which finger to use next.
Greg
> Like I said, this forum turned to crap a long time ago. I have read the
threads
> here every day for the last two years, and rarely post anymore, because
most of
> it has nothing to do with the charter of the newsgroup. Someone said I am
wrong
> about that, that discussion of playing the piano is the purpose of this
forum.
> Sorry - it's not. There are other forums for that. This forum is for
learning
> about the instrument. Now there's nothing wrong with people asking
questions
> regarding how to play one, but that's not what this forum is for.
All due respect, and I have no problem with anything else you've posted in
this thread, but the above is 100% BS, according to the RMMP FAQ and the
newsgroup charter. There are not "other newsgroups" for discussion of piano
playing, at least not where it would be more on topic than it is here.
http://www.landfield.com/usenet/news.announce.newgroups/rec/rec.music.makers.piano
Michael
> I'm not convinced that our friend Michael falls into this catagory. He may
> just have an oddball sense of humor
Indeed, although the punchline was provided by those who posted in reply
to it given M Slater's observation earlier in the thread.
Alas "Can you differentiate triganomic functions on an abacus?" wasn't a
serious attack on your abilities and yes, I am aware that ideograms
wasn't an insult.
--
Michael.
Michael
> I'm starting to see a pattern develop Chris...... somewhere there's a nuthouse
> where the inmates have overpowered the computer room.......
You sir, are an ideogram :o)
--
Michael.
Christof Pflumm
> > If I'm correctly informed, that's not true. Japanese has three sets of
> > "letters", two of them consisting of symbols for syllables, the other
> > consisting of Kanjis. The syllable symbols don't look as complicated
> > as the kanjis. The japanese Kanjis (at least a lot of them) are the
> > same symbols as in chinese, but they have different meanings.
>
> I believe you are incorrectly informed.
Yes, you are correct. I asked my colleague who speaks japanese. A
chinese can indeed read japaneses, the other way round is not so easy,
because there are less kanji in japanese than in chinese. One of the
phonetic type writings is used for foreign words, names etc., the
other for things like prepositions etc. and other japanese words. All
three forms of writing are present in everyday life.
Christof
Dave Tempo
respect and appreciate his desire to defend his position I think there are
times where he goes over the line. I'm not talking about Mike with the
Bernard Steiner and Davey the Dragon Slayer - those are the guys you fire at
with both barrels just for the entertainment of the group. However, when
others might resort to name-calling while trying to discuss on-topic and
fresh issues I think the counter should be more along the lines of what I'm
reading here, a reasoned and relevent counter. Calling someone a sales
weasel (even if they are a sales weasel) is an attack regardless if it's the
first or second volley. Generally the "distance" between parties on the
internet causes things to be stated that would not normally be brought up in
a face to face conversation.
When dealing with issues where the parties disagree a better approach would
be to counter the claim with your point of view and leave it at that. This
group is savvy enough to call BS on someone who is shoveling it. Once
someone starts putting together a big string of name calling such as I see
below their credibility is pretty much shot to hell anyway, you don't need
to fire a shot at them - they've fired it at themselves. If an argument has
merit you don't need to slander the person making it.
If a person takes a pot-shot at you bite your lip, tear their point of view
apart without tearing them apart. I've seen plenty of people come to
Larry's defense when he has remained quiet when attacked and I believe
that's the most effective way to deal with that sort of thing. Don't
forget - usually the yellow flag and the 15 yard penalty comes to the guy
who shoves back.
Can't we all just get along? :-)
DT
"Larry" <larryin...@aol.composer> wrote in message
news:20040211220432...@mb-m02.aol.com...
Chris Aher
You misunderstand me. As the chief architect and perpetrator of that most
elegant and sophisticated swindle known as the "Nigerian Piano Scam" you
have earned an honorary lifetime membership in that most esteemed
organization, Local 12 V.T.S.U. ROAOs by there very nature are not
qualified for membership.
With Kindest Regards,
Boris
http://www.tv-now.com/lance/jul2000.htm
"Mobutu Mbwawe" <mmb...@north.net> wrote in message
news:c0e7p6$16lrf0$1...@ID-21508.news.uni-berlin.de...
drsmith
Larry <larryin...@aol.composer> wrote:
>>From: doog...@aol.com
>
>>When I came back to visit
>>in 2003 after a long hiatus, I was appalled to find you still here
>>trying to dominate the group with crude insults and inane
>>pontificating. Alas, you haven't changed a bit.
>
>
>Well, you're entitled to your opinion. But I've always thought you were a jerk
>anyway, so your opinion is insignificant to me.
>
>Larry
... and you proved his point perfectly, yet again. I've really seen
some difficult people on usenet in my years, but this is practically
unbelievable. You didn't even _try_ to be civil, which would have
at least made some kind of counter-point to his argument.
Larry
>... and you proved his point perfectly, yet again. I've really seen
>some difficult people on usenet in my years, but this is practically
>unbelievable. You didn't even _try_ to be civil, which would have
>at least made some kind of counter-point to his argument.
Dear Dr. Smith,
I saw no reason to be civil. Did he appear to be being civil? No. But again,
you excuse him and attack me. His "argument" was based on his opinion, not
facts. And the facts will not support him. Therefore, I saw no reason to
counterpoint anything. It is what it is - just someone with an ax to grind.
Beyond that, it is obvious you don't like me. It is obvious you don't like what
I have to say. It is also obvious that you have no interest in discussing the
actual meat of this entire thing, which is unprofessional salesmen and the lies
they tell people, but would rather concern yourself with keeping all discussion
focused on your dislike of me and what I have to say.
I don't care whether you like me or not. I don't care whether you like what I
have to say or not. I will not stop correcting the lies salesmen tell their
customers, and I will not stop standing up for myself when I get attacked. That
includes you.
Wayne Fulton
larryin...@aol.composer says...
>
>
>>From: Wayne Fulton
>
>>If any question, just search http://groups.google.com for:
>>
>> larryinatlanta idiot|stupid|dumbass|moron|jerk
>>
>>We can add more words, but that is 534 theads as is. Larry simply enjoys
>>trashing people. Big man.
>
>Mr. Fulton, I will respond politely to you.
Great! Thank you Larry, it's good to see you can do it if you try. I just
wish you'd try more often. Calling everyone every name you can think of
simply because they disagree with you is a very unimpressive debating skill.
It reflects very badly on you. No one cares about anything you have to say
then.
>You can read all 534 of those
>threads, and you won't find a single one where *I* was the initial attacker.
>You apparently think I should just sit there and let others attack and not
>respond. That's not how I handle things. Talk in a reasonable manner, I
>respond in a reasonable manner.
You know that is far from true Larry. Or you're seriously fooling yourself.
The four year usenet history record is very clear, and is extremely different
than your own apparent perception. This thread is very different than your
own perception too. You incorrectly perceive any disagreement as an attack.
You cant handle it, and at any disagreement at all, you can only start
calling names. Unfortunately, this is your style. We all know that, except
maybe you. It is very clear Larry. I just wish you wouldnt do it here.
The google usenet record shows that people have told you this over and over
for four years, but you dont get it yet, so there's little hope of any change
now. Any disagreement with "The Gospel According to Larry", and you can only
call them an idiot and asshole, over and over. End of any discussion about
issues then, it simply becomes your personal attack because they dared to
disagree with you. This is your style, and you're pretty good at that part.
Name calling is what we did in grade school, but most of us gave it up soon.
Sadly, you seem to still take pride in it, but it is not a virtue Larry.
You really should try harder Larry, EVERY TIME. It could do so much for your
image. Some people might even forget. Perhaps we might even discover you
have something to say after all.
Tom Shaw
not able to read the English language or follow a thread on this ng for more
than one post at a time. It was crystal clear, from the beginning, that
Larry was aiming at a salesman who was reported to be dishing out horseshit.
He, Larry, was, as he claims, also trying to help the OP judge a piano. All
this subsequent fuss has been generated by what appear to be folks who dont
like Larry' or his style.
There have been plenty of complaints lodged on this group by casual posters
complaining or telling of the outrageous tactics employed by piano salesman,
i.e. salesmen in general, in selling pianos to igorant customers. It is not
wrong for Larry to castigate these people and there methods when
appropriate, as it was in the case of the OP.
What this reminds me of is the Democratic candidates ganging up on Bush for
the sake of ganging up on Bush and you who are doing that to Larry should be
ashamed considering the amount of time Larry has spent trying to dispense
knowledge and advice about pianos for the last several years.
TS
"Greg" <Hall...@jfkd.com> wrote in message
news:102lt2i...@corp.supernews.com...
Wayne Fulton
>
>
>It has become abundantly clear to me that doogle, drsmith, Wayne Fulton, are
>not able to read the English language or follow a thread on this ng for more
>than one post at a time. It was crystal clear, from the beginning, that
>Larry was aiming at a salesman who was reported to be dishing out horseshit.
>He, Larry, was, as he claims, also trying to help the OP judge a piano. All
>this subsequent fuss has been generated by what appear to be folks who dont
>like Larry' or his style.
>There have been plenty of complaints lodged on this group by casual posters
>complaining or telling of the outrageous tactics employed by piano salesman,
>i.e. salesmen in general, in selling pianos to igorant customers. It is not
>wrong for Larry to castigate these people and there methods when
>appropriate, as it was in the case of the OP.
I guess we all must see what we choose to see. It's not about salesmen.
I see Larry's trashing of Yamaha, and wanting to discuss veneer thickness.
I see Marc ask what veneer has to do with the music?
I see Larry go berserk and call him stupid and worse, repeatedly.
End of that discussion. Inappropriate public behavior.
Larry
>I guess we all must see what we choose to see. It's not about salesmen.
It *was* about salesmen, until a handful of people who apparently aren't able
to follow simple logic jumped in to "whip me into line".
>I see Larry's trashing of Yamaha, and wanting to discuss veneer thickness.
>I see Marc ask what veneer has to do with the music?
>I see Larry go berserk and call him stupid and worse, repeatedly.
>End of that discussion. Inappropriate public behavior.
No sir, it is *not* the end of the discussion. Who is using poor debating
tactics now? I was not trashing Yamaha, and anyone paying attention was aware
of that. It had nothing to do with veneer thickness, other than that it is one
of the differences between the two pianos being compared. What it has to do
with music is a straw man argument. The salesman didn't say the Walter
performed poorly, he told the man it was poorly built. Therefore, the
comparison focused on structural differences, something Marc apparently doesn't
know anything about. I do. I did not go berserk until after twice having tried
to explain this to him, and twice having put up with his *own* condescending
put downs. Now you want to skip over that, and you *still* don't seem to
understand just what the hell was going on.
Sheesh......
Wayne Fulton
larryin...@aol.composer says...
Am I the only one that can read? <g> The OP said it this way:
> A recent visit to a local (primarily Yamaha)piano dealership left me
> wondering about brands and quality. The dealer's opinion was that
> Charles Walter pianos were style over substance... pretty furniture
> with average instruments inside. Of course he said Yamaha pianos were
> significantly better in sound and 'instrument quality' .. but then
> again he doesn't sell Charles Walter pianos.
These are the facts. It was NOT about how the pianos were built Larry, it was
instead about the sound quality. The saleman may have even agreed with you
about the construction, we dont know, but he seems to. So it was NOT about
what the salesman said, therefore it was NOT about the saleman at all. It was
only you Larry that was eager to trash the way the Yamaha was built, and in
your eagerness, you made false assumptions about what was said.
You quoted that back (so I know you saw it) and began with:
>Your Yamaha dealer is engaging in dirt tossing sales tactics. In other words,
>he's a slimeball who doesn't know how to sell what he has so he has to tear
>down everything else. I wouldn't buy a piece of gum from a dealer like that.
Yes, there are good and bad salesmen everywhere. Pianos do seem to be like
used cars. <g> But we have no actual evidence of that this time.
I have also heard others here express the same opinion as the OP's salesman,
which may not be what Larry believes, but it is an opinion too. I'd guess it
may be the standard mellow/bright choice, but it is an opinion too. It doesnt
really matter, opinions are opinions. Slimeball is regretable way to say
yours, and for no apparent reason here. But you are fooling yourself again if
you think what the salesman said is what you were discussing. You were just
too eager to trash Yamaha Larry, you dont seem to know what was said.
Then you got wound up and wanted to discuss veneer thickness, which is OK too,
even if it was off topic in this thread about sound quality. Then Marc
questioned how the veneer affected the music (which was on topic), and this
question (any lack of complete faith) of your logic was your demise. You
seriously dont like ANY disagreement Larry. It's a problem, and you know it.
So its NOT about the salesman, and even if it had been this time, it still is
NOT about the salesman. Opinions are one thing, but it's the berserk part
that is the big problem Larry. We see this is routine procedure with you at
any disagreement. No one is allowed to disagree with Larry, else they face
your immediate vile personal attack. It must get you in trouble all the time.
It's obviously true on Usenet that it does. You really should learn to handle
that better.
I am saying that: "you stupid &$&#%, you dont know $&#&%, you &&%&# moron"
doesnt do it. That part is not so good. That part really hurts you Larry.
Looks real bad. You're old enough to know that <g>
It would go so much better for your usenet reputation if you could learn to
skip over a few things, and simply say: "I disagree, I think it is instead
like this...". Or even, "That's wrong, because it is like this...". Discuss
the issue, stick to the issue, and dont belittle the persons ability to have
an opinion. No one is always right. <g>
I know this is wasted breath, but this shift in attitude would cause an
immediate night and day difference in your Usenet reputation if you could
stick to that without incident. If you have facts and knowledge, then awe
them with facts and knowledge and maybe politeness too. Make them glad to see
you coming, instead of expecting all the insults and cuss words. Those dont
impress anyone, it just casts doubt on yourself and what you say. If you do
have some piano gift, dont waste it this way.
Unless maybe you simply enjoy insulting people. Then in that case, I'd be glad
if you did that somewhere else than here.
Mizz Marcia Ryder
Larry
>Am I the only one that can read? <g> The OP said it this way:
>The dealer's opinion was that
>> Charles Walter pianos were style over substance... pretty furniture
>> with average instruments inside.
Average instrument inside.
>Of course he said Yamaha pianos were
>> significantly better in sound and 'instrument quality' ..
Instrument quality.
>These are the facts. It was NOT about how the pianos were built Larry, it
>was
>instead about the sound quality.
Mr Fulton, I'm sorry to have to say this, that is absolutely ridiculous. How
many times have you walked into a piano store? Half a dozen times? How many
salesmen have you stood and listened to? Two or three? I can see how someone
who has no knowledge of the industry such as yourself would arrive at the
conclusion you did regarding what the salesman was talking about. But the fact
remains, you have arrived at the wrong conclusion. And you have done so because
quite simply you don't know anything about the piano business or how it works.
I was in this business for over 30 years. I will tell you without hesitation
that when a salesman talks to a console piano customer looking for an entry
level piano, and that *is* what the OP was looking for, the salesman is *not*
discussing the finer more esoterical points of touch and tone when he says the
words "instrument quality". I assure you that a salesman talking to a first
time buyer looking for an entry level console piano says the words "average
instrument", he is *not* talking about the finer points of touch and tone. He
is giving a sales pitch. And a sales pitch to a first time buyer looking for an
entry level console revolves around things like "Our piano has a longer
warranty than the competition. Our piano uses thicker widgets under the running
boards than the competition. Wouldn't you want the piano you buy to be built
better and have a better warranty, Mr. Customer?" It *never* is about touch
and tone with this type customer. *Never*. The entire piano business is geared
to talk "nuts and bolts" sales pitches. 100%.
If the OP had been a reasonably accomplished player shopping for a grand, he
wouldn't have even asked the questions he did. He would have listened to the
tone and felt the touch for himself. If a salesman had told him Brand X was
just an "average" instrument, instead of coming here asking us if it sounded
good, he'd have gone and listened to it and made that decision himself.
> I'd guess it
>may be the standard mellow/bright choice, but it is an opinion too.
This shows you don't know anything about pianos. "Mellow/bright" is a term used
by novices. Someone who truly understands tonality sees a much more complex
picture than this. But you're still heading down the wrong rabbit trail. The
salesman's comments had nothing to do with touch or tone, even as simplistic as
you understand those issues.
>You were just
>too eager to trash Yamaha Larry, you dont seem to know what was said.
I am trying hard to remain civil. But I have to tell you - I am getting pretty
tired of trying to get this through your head. I know *exactly* what was said.
I know *exactly* what the salesman was talking about. The one who is missing
the picture here is *you*. I did *not* trash Yamaha. The salesman was *not*
talking about touch and tone, and he *was* talking about construction.
Good Grief.......
Fulton, have you ever heard of the Piano Book? It is the most inclusive,
unbiased source of information on the market today. It is the book that almost
everyone shopping for a piano goes out and gets, to help them sort out all the
details. Do you know what 80% of the discussion in that book is about?
CONSTRUCTION QUALITY.
Not touch, not tone, but how the damned thing is built. This is important,
because it doesn't matter how great a piano feels and sounds when it is new,
the big question in most people's minds when they are getting ready to spend
large sums of money for a piano is HOW LONG WILL THE DAMNED THING LAST. Now -
instead of repeating your misinformed johnny one note speech about how I was
"trashing Yamaha", why don't you go read the book and see what *he* says about
them. Then read what he says about Walter. If you think *I* was hard on
Yamaha, you ain't seen nothing.
Your problem sir, is you are ignorant (and I don't say that as an attack or to
be mean) about pianos, the piano industry, and how people shop for them. In
your ignorance, you have reached a conclusion that is unfortunately incorrect,
but you are so adamant that you are right that you refuse to see a thing being
said to you.
I hope this time something got through your skull. Because I have had just
about all I can take of you. You see me as rude, I see you as a self important
knowitall who always thinks he knows more than the experts.
>It would go so much better for your usenet reputation if you could learn to
>skip over a few things, and simply say: "I disagree, I think it is instead
>like this...".
Don't talk down to me bud, and don't tell me how to handle my "usenet
reputation. I don't need nor want your advice. My usenet reputation is just
fine, contrary to your short sighted opinion of it. You don't see the emails I
get from people who tell me they like my straight forward style, and the way I
lay the facts out for them to see. Informed musicians make up a very tiny % of
the total picture. By far most people shopping for a piano are novices who
don't even know what questions to ask, and who really appreciate it when
someone who *does* know lays it out for them in easy to understand terms, and
who exposes the tricks and lies they get hit with when shopping. Whether you
believe that or not is of absolutely no concern to me.
>No one is allowed to disagree with Larry, else they face your immediate vile
personal attack.
This is your opinion, and it is as incorrect as what you thought the salesman
was talking about. I have had lots of people disagree with me about things, and
when the disagreement is over a subjective issue where no misinformation is
involved, I don't tell anyone they are wrong for holding a certain opinion. If
you tell me a Bechstein is too bright, that's fine. If you tell me it is built
out of apple crates in a factory in Iceland, I'm going to correct you. If you
continue to argue with me over something like that where I know the facts and
you aren't anywhere near them, I will *continue* to correct you. Try to be a
smartass about it because for whatever reason you don't like it that I'm
correcting you, and I'll shove it down your neck.
Now - the long and short of it is this: no offense, but you don't know enough
about the piano business to be discussing this thread, and you don't know
enough about me to make any fair assessment of things. You've missed the boat
on every single point you've talked about, and you still aren't able to
understand it. So why don't you just tell yourself that I am an asshole that
you don't like, and leave me alone. I have tried to explain this stuff to you
far too many times now, and I'm getting tired of it. Others have come forward
to attest to the fact that they see it the same way I do, so I am certain most
people understand this, even though you apparently don't. So just let it alone.
You think I need to change my ways. I think you need to listen and learn more
and inject your opinions less. So just walk away.
Larry
Hi Marcia! Haven't talked to you in a while! Thank you!
(oh..... I forgot, Marcia..... I'm supposed to attack you and be mean.... quick
- tell me I'm wrong about something so I can call you names...... ;-)
Christof Pflumm
> Mr. Fulton, I will respond politely to you. You can read all 534 of those
> threads, and you won't find a single one where *I* was the initial
> attacker.
It would be interesting for me to know where Marc attacked you. If I
look at your answer to him in article
<20040209003616...@mb-m16.aol.com> I just can't see why he should
deserve something like (I cite you):
> Are you really this freaking stupid?
Bye,
Christof
Doogle333
including stencil- brand instruments such as "Weber."
Larry says he hates what he calls sleazy salesman tactics. When it comes to
putting an old, well-respected American name like "Weber" on a cheap Chinese or
Korean pianos, Larry says he thinks that is an acceptable business practice
because other people do it.
According to Larry, "Weber" stopped distributing pianos recently. Until then
they imported instruments made by various manufacturers in the People's
Republic of China and Korea. Larry recommended Weber- brand pianos to his
customers, calling them a good value for the money.
Larry's biggest competition was Yamaha. As everyone knows, Yamaha sells a lot
of pianos because Yamaha has a good reputation in the marketplace and many
people like the way they sound and play. Yamaha pianos usually receive good
reviews and recommendations in sources such as Larry Fine's Piano Book.
There was a Yamaha dealership near Larry. They sold more Yamaha pianos that
Larry did "Webers." Larry could see all the pianos moving in and out the
Yamaha dealership and it didn't make him feel good.
Larry has been in the piano business for a long time and he knows better then
customers what they ought to buy.
Larry doesn't like to see customers pay good money for Yamaha pianos,
especially because Larry knows they sound terrible and he can see that they
have thin veneer.
Larry calls Yamaha's "entry level" pianos and tells people they would be better
off buying something else, such as a "Weber."
Anyone can use Google to find all the messages Larry posted on r.m.m.p for
many years. If you do that, you will see many -- hundreds or thousands -
of Larry's posts saying negative things about Yamaha pianos. When anybody
asks about Yamaha pianos, Larry usually tells them they should buy something
else. Larry once tried to persuade a poster that he would be better off buying
a Wurlitzer than a Yamaha.
Aside from Larry's opinion that Yamaha pianos have poor sound and quality, you
can find examples of Larry posting incorrect and false factual claims about
Yamaha pianos, including statements about certain models having cheap plastic
parts when they did not, and so on. In some cases, other posters have
challenged Larry's false statements, and then Larry usually tried to bluff his
way through. As a last resort he sometimes admits he was wrong, but being
wrong never seems to affect his opinion.
You will also find posts in which Larry grossly misquoted what Fine's Piano
Book has to say about Yamaha pianos.
You will find Larry Fletcher trashing Yamaha salesmen, calling them
unprofessional and unethical. You will find threads in which he says all
Yamaha salesmen have B.O and stink. You will find posts in which Larry accuses
the Yamaha company of making false statements about how they season woods they
use in their pianos. This is all on the record for everyone to see, for all
time. This is all in addition to Larry's remarkable encyclopedic record of
filthy language and personal attacks directed against hundreds of people on
r.m.m.p.
"Weber" pianos have now gone down the drain. So did Larry's piano business.
Larry has issues with Yamaha.
Larry -- as you can see, I have tried to be strictly factual in the above post.
If you respond, everyone will be looking to see to what extent you restrict
yourself to a factual rebuttal.
Best regards,
-Doogle
drsmith
Larry <larryin...@aol.composer> wrote:
>>From: drsm...@hotmail.com (drsmith)
>
>>... and you proved his point perfectly, yet again. I've really seen
>>some difficult people on usenet in my years, but this is practically
>>unbelievable. You didn't even _try_ to be civil, which would have
>>at least made some kind of counter-point to his argument.
>
>
>Dear Dr. Smith,
Not a Dr. - those are my initials.
>I saw no reason to be civil. Did he appear to be being civil? No. But again,
>you excuse him and attack me. His "argument" was based on his opinion, not
>facts. And the facts will not support him. Therefore, I saw no reason to
>counterpoint anything. It is what it is - just someone with an ax to grind.
Good enough, I suppose. Read on...
>Beyond that, it is obvious you don't like me. It is obvious you don't like what
>I have to say. It is also obvious that you have no interest in discussing the
>actual meat of this entire thing, which is unprofessional salesmen and the lies
>they tell people, but would rather concern yourself with keeping all discussion
>focused on your dislike of me and what I have to say.
Not true - I don't know enough about you to form an opinion yet on if
I like you or not. As for your communications tactics, that's where
I take issue. This is a discussion forum - communicating effectively
is an important goal here(or don't bother to post for that matter - why
even attempt to discuss something if no one's going to read it?).
Anyway, when the debate falls into line after line of insults, name
calling, etc. I just tune out at that point. I didn't post the reply
above because I wanted to focus on some sort of dislike of you. Believe
it or not, I really do want to read what you have to say and I want my
time here in the group to be productive. When the content of the post
is more about the attacks than answering the question, it's a waste of
time for both of us(the time you spent typing it, and the time I took to
even start reading it). If you ask me, that's a worthwhile goal even if
the post happens to be offtopic.
Sorry if I pissed you off, but that certainly was not my intention.
Wayne Fulton
larryin...@aol.composer says...
>I hope this time something got through your skull. Because I have had just
>about all I can take of you. You see me as rude, I see you as a self
important
>knowitall who always thinks he knows more than the experts.
So apparently your trigger is any mention of the word salesman? The one word
will set you off? It is not about the salesman Larry, your actions are about
you. What set you off was the doubt that veneer affected the music, and that
tirade wasnt about veneer, it was only about how could anyone be so stupid to
doubt Larry? There is some merit to that view, the verbal abuse personal
attack is swift and certain. But other than Mr Fine's great book, I dont
know about pianos, so I dont discuss pianos. However I am pretty sure Mr
Fine never insulted us, and I am certain that my part of this is not about
pianos.
We have unfortunately seen way too much of your extreme rudeness (that word
is simply insufficient, only a hint, but other than berserk, I dont know a
word for this special degree) on the internet for years. I do know a lot
about that, very much more than you might imagine. That record of your
continual personal attacks at any disagreement is out there for all to see,
and it is very clear and unambiguous. You simply enjoy insulting people that
disagree with you, vile personal insults. It is puzzling how you can take
pride in this, but there is overwhelming indisputable evidence on record.
This is unfortunately not your private matter, when you continually force
that unpleasantness on all of us here year after year, then it is a very
public issue. I held back a couple of days thinking about the wisdom of not
wrestling with pigs (an old saying), and wondering why get involved with
this? But somehow it weighed very heavily on me, it just wouldnt go away, so
I needed to discuss it with you, I wanted you to know. I see that countless
others before me have brought up this problem to you too, so I dont expect
anything.
But I am pleased that you have proven me wrong in some degree because you
have surprisingly remained civil to me (however to very few others).
Frankly, I couldnt imagine that would be possible for you, so I do thank you
for trying. I'm sure that was quite difficult for you, because this is an
extreme situation - I am guilty of personal attack here with you too, because
I am intentionally discussing your personal behavior (not pianos). I'm not at
all proud of my part of this, even if it does need to be said (one more
time). I dont think my stating the obvious facts is formally an insult. I
know it does sound insulting, but I stuck to the obvious fact of what you do.
However you have shown me that my claim of "always" was not 100% accurate,
since you have been an exception here with me. So you can do it, one just
wonders why you never try to do it? All it takes is one second thought "do I
really need to say this here?" It is hard to understand that you cannot see
any advantage in that? Humans do value civility.
So it occurs to me that if you can remain civil with me, then you should be
able to remain civil with anyone when merely discussing pianos.
Unless of course the thrill for you is the insults. (still my bet, but I hope
you will prove me wrong in the future. However I dont expect that)
I am tiring of it too, it has gone much farther than I intended, and there is
no reason to think my try is not as ineffective as any before me. So I hope
to let it rest now.
Tom Shaw
Plonk.
TS
"Doogle333" <doog...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040213114832...@mb-m07.aol.com...
Larry
>What set you off was the doubt that veneer affected the music, and that
>tirade wasnt about veneer, it was only about how could anyone be so stupid to
>
>doubt Larry?
See Fulton, this is the kind of mindless logic that gets me. What will it take
to get it through your thick skull that veneer affecting tone had nothing to do
with it. Veneer had nothing to do with it. It was the fact that I was
discussing the issue the OP and the salesman was discussing, and your cohort,
because he knows nothing else about a piano except how to play one, decides it
is about tone so he jumps in without knowing what is being discussed and
attacks me based on his ignorance of the subject. Then you come along,
apparently thinking you are the Lone Ranger or someone, adamant that you are
going to correct what you see as my bad behavior, and rabbit trail off on his
tangent, taking it even further off course. My "tirade" as you call it, was
because a couple of smug know it alls jumped in and with nothing but ignorance
and pompous wind to back them up, took things so far off course one has to read
the entire thread just to see what's happening.
>But other than Mr Fine's great book, I dont
>know about pianos, so I dont discuss pianos.
Well what in the hell have you been basing your disagreements regarding pianos
on?
>and I am certain that my part of this is not about pianos.
Again, if your part "is not about pianos", then why have you been challenging
the information presented? It was you after all, who claimed you inspected a
P22 and didn't need to see a Walter to make a comparison. The fact is, you have
done your best to be contrary to every single point I've made, regardless of
what it has been. No, you *don't* know anything about pianos. That's the whole
point. Neither of you do, and neither of you know anything about how they are
sold, or what I was trying to accomplish. You sit there in total ignorant bliss
thinking you have "helped" by trying to "whip me into line", when all you've
done is take the focus away from the valuable part of the thread. Of course,
you seem incapable of understanding just what that valuable part is, so it is
a waste of breath at this point to even bother with it.
>You simply enjoy insulting people that
>disagree with you, vile personal insults. It is puzzling how you can take
>pride in this, but there is overwhelming indisputable evidence on record.
Not hardly. And I'm tired of you trotting out that little line, because it is
simply not true. I do *not* enjoy insulting people, until they have insulted
me. Stupidity insults me. If someone insults me, I am insulted.
> needed to discuss it with you, I wanted you to know
>But I am pleased that you have proven me wrong in some degree
>Frankly, I couldnt imagine that would be possible for you,
>I'm sure that was quite difficult for you,
>I am guilty of personal attack here with you too,
>I am intentionally discussing your personal behavior (not pianos).
>I'm not at
>all proud of my part of this, even if it does need to be said
>I dont think my stating the obvious facts is formally an insult.
>but I hope
>you will prove me wrong in the future. However I dont expect that)
If you had facts, it would be one thing. But you don't. You have decided that
based on what little experience you've had with me, and reading some old posts
from the archives out of context and without knowing what was happening at the
time, that you know me better than I do.
The facts are, you don't know anything about pianos, you don't know anything
about how they are sold, you don't even know enough to be able to figure out
obvious things like what was being discussed. After claiming you knew all that
you needed to know to debate me on the topic of pianos, you dismissed
everything I had said as rubbish. Then, after successfully flipping things
completely upside down because in your ignorance you thought the discussion was
about tone, you admit you know nothing about pianos, and that you are simply
trying to harass me. So it is time for me to quit being polite to you, and show
you some ot that "blunt" style you don't like. You are a royal pain in the ass
who has accused me of having nothing to offer, and then proven it is in fact
*you* who has nothing to offer. For every blunt or aggressive comment you can
lay at my feet, there are two smug, self important condescending cracks from
you. Just because you couch your insults in polite language does not mean they
weren't insults, or intended as such. The one wrestling with a pig is ME. So
you have a choice, peckerhead - keep wrestling, or shut up. You already know
what a low class piece of trash *I* am, right? So you know what to expect.
Hopefully though you will shut your ignorant trap so we can go back to
discussing pianos. And next time you think I'm saying something that's not
fair, ask me what I'm talking about first before you decide to save my soul.
You might learn something.
Wayne Fulton
larryin...@aol.composer says...
>You already know
>what a low class piece of trash *I* am, right? So you know what to expect.
You got this part right Larry, I do know.
Good luck, I'm sure you must lead an interesting life. <LOL>
Larry
>You got this part right Larry, I do know.
>Good luck, I'm sure you must lead an interesting life. <LOL>
Let's cut to the chase here, Fulton. You just did what you claim you object to.
You called me low class trash. Nowhere have I called *you* low class trash. I
think that calling someone low class trash is about as vile as a person can
get, wouldn't you agree?
Let me ask you this - You claim your only concern is over my writing
objectionable things, making nasty personal attacks, as you put it. You claim
this kind of stuff is offensive to you, insults you, and that people should be
above that. You claim your only concern is to get me to stop doing that. Well -
Doogle has posted the most vile, nasty, libelous list of garbage about me that
one could post. He got as nasty and vile as you can get.
Why have you not taken *him* to task for that? Answer that for me, Fulton. Why
are you silent? Will you harass him for it the same way you have me?
No, you won't. And I know why. You aren't simply an innocent bystander offended
by personal attacks, and rude remarks. No, you have a little *agenda*, don't
you Fulton? Through all your whining and complaining about me, you end up
calling me worse than anything I've said all through this thread - you've ended
up being nastier and more offensive than me. And you have completely ignored
others who have been rude and offensive, and made personal attacks.
The truth is, you're nothing more than a wormy bastard of a man, a liar, a two
faced hypocrite who thinks he's a lot smarter than you actually are, and you're
no more an innocent shopper here looking for information than a man in the
moon. You're so low down when you fart your ears wiggle. You're no different
from our most famous village idiot davey, except he at least had a personality.
Davey was a village idiot with a touch of occasional humor. You're just a
village idiot. And yes Fulton, I'll come out from behind this computer screen
and stand in your face and say that any time you'd like.
No, you won't challenge Doogie over *his* rude, nasty, personal attacks against
me, because it isn't those things you don't like. You have an agenda.
But *I* will go now, and toast your buddy Doogies, nuts.
Wayne Fulton
larryin...@aol.composer says...
Thanks Larry. There is no uncertainty now. <LOL>