RFI: Action on a Baldwin Acrosonics 40 inch piano?
Hany Aziz
(made in 1970)?
Is it a spinet or console action?
What do people think of such a piano? How does it compare to the
Krakauer console (also from the 70s) I mentioned in an earlier post?
How would it compare to a cheaper Kawai or Yamaha, new or used?
Thanks for any info?
Sincerely,
Hany.
Gary M. Letchinger
I believe that the Acrosonic "console" size pianos used the
spinet-style drop action. The drop action allowed the upper part of
the cabinet to be thinner as compared to a regular console. The tone
was slightly better with the longer scale, but basically it was a
bigger Baldwin spinet. I played one about 18 months ago and it was a
pretty lousy piano, but the sample I played was older and poorly
maintained.
Personally, I'd take a Kawai or Yamaha console over a spinet any day.
The action will be much better. I've never seen or played a Krakauer
so I can't comment on it.
- -
/**********************************************************************\
* Gary M. Letchinger
* San Diego, California
* Reply to the newsgroup only
\**********************************************************************/
Dave Andrews
<< I believe that the Acrosonic "console" size pianos used the
spinet-style drop action. The drop action allowed the upper part of
the cabinet to be thinner as compared to a regular console.>>
No. The drop action allowed a full sized mechanism to fit into a 40" console,
which was the standard console height back in the 60's and 70's. A full sized
studio type action that directly connects to the key requires a much taller
piano. Hence, 44"-45" studio pianos, and most console pianos with compressed
actions.
<< The tone was slightly better with the longer scale, but basically it was a
bigger Baldwin spinet. I played one about 18 months ago and it was a
pretty lousy piano, but the sample I played was older and poorly
maintained. >>
I've played hundreds of them, and your single experience is merely your
experience. My experience would run contrary to yours, and I maintain that my
experience contains a much larger sample of all brands you have mentioned in
this post.
<< Personally, I'd take a Kawai or Yamaha console over a spinet any day. >>
In most cases, this would "at best" be a lateral move (if you're comparing
Acrosonic 40" drop action Console's) and more commonly, a step down since the
scale design on the Baldwin instrument was (and still is) far better than a
Kawai or Yamaha of comparable size, and the Kawai and Yamaha use compressed
actions in their consoles. I will cede Kawai and Yamaha reputations for being
known for better consistency in build quality, but a properly maintained 40"
Acrosonic is a great piano for a console sized instrument.
<< The action will be much better. >>
The repetition rate and dynamic control of a full sized mechanism -- even if it
is a drop action -- is inherently and indisputedly better than a directly
connecting compressed action.
<< I've never seen or played a Krakauer
so I can't comment on it. >>
You obviously shouldn't have commented on the Acrosonic, either. Stick to what
you know.
--
With All Due Respect,
Dave Andrews
D. W. Andrews Associates
Church Music System Specialists
"Two Hacks Working Out Of A Garage"
Disclaimer: If there are two ways to take my words,
always assume I was after the cheap laugh.
Gary M. Letchinger
wrote:
Excuse me, but my description of the 40" Acrosonic was essentially
correct. A drop action in a somewhat bigger cabinet than the spinet. I
also made clear that my single experience was just that and may not
have been representative because the sample was poorly maintained.
The one I saw had a stepped cabinet top that would not have
accommodated a direct blow action, and it did make the cabinet look a
bit less imposing than a bulkier cabinet. It certainly looked a lot
smaller than a Hamilton which is only a few inches taller. As for
Baldwin's motivation in the design, I will admit that was speculation.
But Baldwin certainly did market the Acrosonic line as something that
would look nice in the living room and cabinet appearance was
important.
I owned a 36" Baldwin Acrosonic spinet for 2 years and recently
replaced it with a Kawai 50" upright. The Baldwin had the full size,
drop action typical of the Acrosonic. The action on Baldwin was not
very good; it was too light and mushy, and you could not get very much
dynamic range out of it. The piano was in good condition with little
wear to the action and was serviced every 6 months. It was simply the
way the piano was.
I played a *lot* of pianos before buying my Kawai, including several
Kawai consoles with compressed actions, one Yamaha console, and many
consoles, studios, full size uprights, and grands from various
manufacturers. In my opinion, the action on the Kawai and Yamaha
consoles was much superior to the Baldwin spinet. Of course, the
action on my 50" Kawai was better still (which is one reason I bought
it), and I played a number of pianos with action superior to my Kawai
(but out of my price range).
I am not a piano professional nor am I an accomplished pianist. I
never made any claim of special expertise. But having endured the
Baldwin drop action for 2 years on a daily basis, I think my opinion
on the issue has some value. This forum is not just for the pros; it's
for everyone to express their opinions. I try to state the basis of my
assertions and the readers can judge their worth for themselves. Feel
free to disagree with my opinion, but don't tell me not to express it.
M. Slater
Drop action sucks. The end.
Mark
Knute Hestness
I don't know about the quality of the Acrosonics from the 70's but I
own one that was built in the 30's. In it's class I have been told
it's the one of the best and from my experience in playing a ton of
others I am very happy with it.
Here is a link to a post from the past regarding 1970's era
Arcrosonics:
~ Knute
Gary M. Letchinger <nos...@cox.net> wrote in message news:<1iihqu4tj5976nt0r...@4ax.com>...
Dave Andrews
<< Excuse me, but my description of the 40" Acrosonic was essentially
correct. >>
I beg your pardon, but you just said "the drop action allowed the upper part of
the cabinet to be thinner as compared to a regular console." This is factually
incorrect. Thinner is not shorter. The full sized drop action was chosen as
an alternative to a direct connecting compressed action as a better solution to
fitting a mechanism into the *shorter than studio* sized piano case. So
therefore, you're assertion was wrong. Your further inference that an indirect
action was inferior to a direct action without providing any qualifiers was
equally incorrect. They both caught my attention and I posted a correction.
A full sized drop action has a repetition rate 23% faster than a compressed
direct action. It also has (properly regulated) far more in the way of
inherent dynamics due to the sheer physics involved. We call it leverage.
Embrace the concept.
<< I owned a 36" Baldwin Acrosonic spinet for 2 years and recently
replaced it with a Kawai 50" upright. The Baldwin had the full size,
drop action typical of the Acrosonic. The action on Baldwin was not
very good >>
The action on *your* Baldwin may not have been very good for numerous reasons
(most not related to the engineering and/or design), but in comparison to what
competitive products offer *in that class*, the Baldwin action is inherently
superior.
<< it was too light and mushy, and you could not get very much dynamic range
out of it. >>
Complaining about the dynamic range of a piano with roughly 1800 square inches
of soundboard and a number one bass string length of 39-5/8" in the same breath
that you extol the virtues of a 50" upright is like whining about how lousy the
ride is in your Chevette compared to your Caprice Classic. Get real.
<< In my opinion, the action on the Kawai and Yamaha consoles was much superior
to the Baldwin spinet. >>
In my opinion, your extremely limited experiences are in direct odds with
reality and have become your number one obstacle to having a more appropriate
sense of context.
<< having endured the Baldwin drop action for 2 years on a daily basis, I think
my opinion
on the issue has some value. >>
Here's why you are wrong. A sample of one is statistically insignificant.
When you assert that "such and such" is not as good as "so and so" on the basis
of such limited experience, you do a disservice to those looking for the best
product in a given class as well as a disservice to those manufacturing and/or
selling the product that you have unfairly denigrated. Blow all of the smoke
that you want, but don't whine at me when I clip your wings for inaccuracies in
a public post.
<< This forum is not just for the pros; it's
for everyone to express their opinions. >>
Have at it.
<< Feel free to disagree with my opinion, but don't tell me not to express it.
>>
I fully disagreed with your uninformed opinion and stated so, but I didn't tell
you "not" to express it. I told you in a fairly polite way that you were wrong
and that you should have stuck to stuff that you know for sure. Now that we've
established by your own admission that you're "not a piano professional" nor
"an accomplished pianist" we have the proper context for evaluating any of your
future posts.
Dave Andrews
<< Here is a simple rule of thumb:
Drop action sucks. The end. >>
P.S Sommeliers make lousy piano engineers.
M. Slater
> Now that we've
>established by your own admission that you're "not a piano professional" nor
>"an accomplished pianist" we have the proper context for evaluating any of
>your
>future posts.
With all due respect, I am an accomplished pianist, and I will re-iterate and
expand: drop action in tiny spinets sucks. Regardless of Baldwin's former
expertise in manufacturing these once popular instruments, they are fine for
playing church hymns and show tunes. For serious music, they are seriously
deficient, both in sound and action. There's a reason they stopped making them.
Mark
Gary M. Letchinger
wrote:
><< In my opinion, the action on the Kawai and Yamaha consoles was much superior
>to the Baldwin spinet. >>
>
>In my opinion, your extremely limited experiences are in direct odds with
>reality and have become your number one obstacle to having a more appropriate
>sense of context.
>
><< having endured the Baldwin drop action for 2 years on a daily basis, I think
>my opinion
>on the issue has some value. >>
>
>Here's why you are wrong. A sample of one is statistically insignificant.
>When you assert that "such and such" is not as good as "so and so" on the basis
>of such limited experience, you do a disservice to those looking for the best
>product in a given class as well as a disservice to those manufacturing and/or
>selling the product that you have unfairly denigrated. Blow all of the smoke
>that you want, but don't whine at me when I clip your wings for inaccuracies in
>a public post.
My last comment on this topic:
My Baldwin spinet was not a bad piano for the money I spent. Compared
to other pianos at its price point, it was a good buy. But compared to
a somewhat more expensive Japanese console, the latter was the better
piano. I haven't done a scientific, statistically accurate survey,
but I doubt very much if you have a statistical survey we can refer to
either.
Many dealers I've visited recommended against buying spinets. That
seems to be the advice in Larry Fine's book as well, where he suggests
avoiding spinets, in part because "the action is inaccessible and hard
to service," and suggests a piano at least 40" in height. Mr. Fine
recommends "a full size, direct blow action." Certainly, many others
have posted comments in this forum recommending that first-time buyers
steer clear of spinets. While the 40" Baldwin Acrosonic has a longer
scale and bigger soundboard, it still has the spinet-style drop
action. I do not think I am alone in suggesting that may not be the
best option, if the budget permits other choices.
Dave Andrews
<< With all due respect, I am an accomplished pianist, and I will re-iterate
and
expand: drop action in tiny spinets sucks. >>
The context of the thread was a 40" console. The discussion centered on the
validity of the full size drop versus the direct compressed. An accomplished
pianist would gravitate towards either a full sized *and* direct connecting
action (such as a studio or larger vertical) or a grand piano action rather
than either of the two being discussed. Your post makes an arguably valid
point but is out of context here.
Dave Andrews
<< My Baldwin spinet was not a bad piano for the money I spent. Compared
to other pianos at its price point, it was a good buy. >>
Of course it was, assuming a decent sample.
<< But compared to a somewhat more expensive Japanese console, the latter was
the better
piano. I haven't done a scientific, statistically accurate survey,
but I doubt very much if you have a statistical survey we can refer to
either. >>
The discussion was on the responsiveness of the full sized drop action versus a
direct connecting compressed action. I do not need a scientifically accurate
survey to prove to you that a full sized mechanism -- drop or no -- has greater
leverage for greater expressivity and dynamics, and a faster repetition rate
than any compressed action known to man. All I need is science -- i.e.
physics. You may prefer a 40" to 42" Yamaha or Kawai console to a Baldwin
Acrosonic 40" console, but you would be clearly choosing a lower level of
engineering in the mechanism (not to mention in the overall scale design of the
piano).
<< Many dealers I've visited recommended against buying spinets. >>
One does not have to visit too many dealers to understand that, when there is a
commercial interest involved, a lot of objectivity suffers. You might also
consider that many dealers attend sales training seminars from a single source,
and their information is limited in scope. Accomplished and experienced piano
technicians that are unencumbered by brand specific financial interests are a
much more reliable source of unbiased information.
<< That seems to be the advice in Larry Fine's book as well, where he suggests
avoiding spinets, in part because "the action is inaccessible and hard
to service, and suggests a piano at least 40" in height. Mr. Fine
recommends "a full size, direct blow action." >>
Please understand this difference. Drop actions are "harder" to service, but
not necessarily "hard" to service, according to many experienced techs with
whom I have spoken. Most people who own drop action spinets or consoles rarely
if ever encounter a problem that would require them to pay a service fee higher
than that of a comparable console for an equivalent adjustment.
As for Mr. Fine recommending "a full size, direct blow action", these are found
only in studio size and larger vertical pianos -- with the exception of the
current style 42" and larger Baldwin consoles which use a special dowled key
and a more severe slope from front to back to allow a full size direct
connecting action to fit inside the shorter piano. Thus, Mr. Fine's opinion is
out of context in this thread.
<< Certainly, many others have posted comments in this forum recommending that
first-time buyers steer clear of spinets. >>
Yes, and often to the detriment of a buyer who may choose a crummy console at
the expense of a more musically useful and economical spinet, just because he
or she did not have a complete understanding of the differences. Hence, the
nature of my post contrary to yours.
<< While the 40" Baldwin Acrosonic has a longer
scale and bigger soundboard, it still has the spinet-style drop
action. I do not think I am alone in suggesting that may not be the
best option, if the budget permits other choices. >>
When comparing apples to apples, the full sized drop action is clearly and
provably superior to the direct compressed action. This does not mean that the
pianos being compared are equal. There are more things to consider than
actions, but then again, that's all I was addressing, was it not?
robertandrews
>What do people think of such a piano?
Could be a nice sounding piano. The older ones (30's - 40's) sound even
better.
>How does it compare to the Krakauer console (also from the 70s) I mentioned
in an earlier post?
I don't know that brand.
>How would it compare to a cheaper Kawai or Yamaha, new or used?
I don't like Kawais & Yamahas. Tonally, they're inferior pianos, at all
price levels & all models. Yamahas have very good actions, though.
milhous
Dave Andrews wrote:
> One does not have to visit too many dealers to understand that, when there is a
> commercial interest involved, a lot of objectivity suffers. You might also
> consider that many dealers attend sales training seminars from a single source,
> and their information is limited in scope. Accomplished and experienced piano
> technicians that are unencumbered by brand specific financial interests are a
> much more reliable source of unbiased information.
>
> << That seems to be the advice in Larry Fine's book as well, where he suggests
> avoiding spinets, in part because "the action is inaccessible and hard
> to service, and suggests a piano at least 40" in height. Mr. Fine
> recommends "a full size, direct blow action." >>
>
> Please understand this difference. Drop actions are "harder" to service, but
> not necessarily "hard" to service, according to many experienced techs with
> whom I have spoken. Most people who own drop action spinets or consoles rarely
> if ever encounter a problem that would require them to pay a service fee higher
> than that of a comparable console for an equivalent adjustment.
>
If I may throw my 2 cents in: I think every tuner/technician has encountered
older pianos where some sort of minor problem crops up on a regular basis. Broken
strings, "walking centerpins", etc.
As spinets have been in production for over 50 years, and many of them are bought
as inexpensive "as-is" starter pianos, there are plenty of instruments out there
that fit that category. Unless the owner has the money to track down these
problems in one burst of preventative maintenance, then that may mean the action
gets pulled at every tuning...and that Will add up to higher service fees.
I don't necessarily discourage people from buying spinets- some of which can be a
better choice as you say- but action accessibility should be kept in mind. Of
course, it would be better still if buyers had the piano inspected before
purchasing/ moving it, but that is not always done.
If I remember the Baldwin drop-action console correctly, one can't reach the butt
flange screws without removing the action? That's certainly harder to service, if
one needs to space a hammer or replace a shank.