Baldwyn or Yamaha
Sudhakar Rachakonda
Hi,
I am trying to decide between a Baldwyn and a Yamaha piano.
Both of them are are 45 inches in height and cost about the same,
$4500 for a brnd new one with Cherry finish. Naturally, the salesman at
each of the store
I went to, tried to push only what they had in stock, calling the other
brand junk.
Can someone help me figure out which one is good?
Thanks in advance,
Sudhakar
AppStudio
I can only speak for the Yamahas because I do not know much about the
Baldwin line of pianos. Anyways, for a 45 inch Yamaha upright with Cherry
finish, I am assuming you mean a T116 model, right? This is an excellent
piano which I highly recommend, but I think you should be able to get it
less than $4500. I have seen them frequently between $3750 and $4000.
Brian
IBruton
Isaac B.
Dave Zappa
Bill Gates personally responsible by the way. Anyway, I missed the
original post but any Baldwin vs. Yamaha post I can't stand to not
participate in.
Baldwin vertical pianos leave much to be desired IMO when compared with
Yamaha. In order to contain costs they don't do little things like lead
weight & balance the keysticks, notch the ribs into the soundboard
liner, staple reinforce the hammers, notch the back side of the bridge,
etc... They build the action in Mexico (not that it's BAD, but they
certainly go out of their way to tell you how great they are because
they are built in the USA when most of the parts aren't). Reason? I
think it's they lack the capitol equipment necessary to add these
features in a cost effective manner. The "hand built" story is almost
getting nauseating. Both Yamaha and Baldwin are an assembly-built,
production piano. In the vertical realm, Yamaha simply does a better
job of building a quality piano.
Anyway pianos aren't exactly the sum of their parts, each piano has to
be judged by the individual based on the merits of performance and
style. Baldwin pianos are fine for some people, I just think they could
take a lesson from Yamaha in the quality department.
Dave
--
Retail salesperson formerly representing 17 different acoustic &
digital piano brands. Support your local service-oriented dealer.
Opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect the
opinions of my employer.
To reply by e-mail please remove the "SPAMTHIS" from my address.
l...@epix.net
dza...@SPAMTHISqni.com wrote:
> Anyway pianos aren't exactly the sum of their parts, each piano has to
> be judged by the individual based on the merits of performance and
> style. Baldwin pianos are fine for some people, I just think they could
> take a lesson from Yamaha in the quality department.
>
> Dave
Dave, I guess you've tried Baldwin's top of the line upright? I'd like to try
that one, as it looks very nice in pictures at their web site (6000 is the
model, I think). If it played as nice as it looked, they'e have something. .
.
I think that Baldwin is scaling back. I just heard they closed one of their
factories. It's a shame. It's been an incredibly mis-managed company. Their
Artist Grands are great products that with some refinements could rival any
piano on the market. I love my L. In spite of a few design flaws, and sloppy
bellywork, it sounds beautiful.
But back to Yamaha, some of the new, cheaper uprights they've introduced are
bad enough to give Baldwin a real run for the money when is comes to throwing
junk on the floor to offer something at a low price. . . and the quality of
their higher end is not what it once was, IMO.
The piano industry is in a sad state presently. It needs to be re-thought
from the ground up. If put more energy into educating their consumers, and
promoting musical values, rather than just marketing gimmicks, they'd make
more money in the long-run, and be able to focus their attentions refining
several quality designs, rather than wasting good materials on the all the
junk that they're putting on the floor now.
People would be happy to spend more on a better instrument, if they
understood they were made to understand a few fundamentals. I'm quite sure of
that. After all, they'll borrow beg, and steal to own a $50,000 Range Rover
or Land Cruiser, won't they? The value system creates the economy. George
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
PDtek
I think that something very important is missing in the advice I see given
here.
I agree that Yamaha is the better built piano, but a Baldwin is not likely to
fall apart in your living room either.
What is most important to the pianist is the sound of the piano and these two
brands are very different in tone. Yamaha, like most Asian pianos has a very
clean, razor sharp tone. Baldwin, like most American pianos has a warmer tone
with a hint of falseness in the vibration of the strings which technicians hate
but is the very thing that endears this piano to many players. In fact, players
that like Baldwins find Yamahas to be somewhat steril sounding and lacking in
texture. It's too common for technicians to recommend pianos based on what they
see inside when they service them and how easy they are to tune because the
unisons just pop into place. Of course you should steer someone away from some
cheap stencil piano that will cause much grief, but between Yamaha and Baldwin?
I would ask the pianist, which one really speaks to you when you sit down to
play it.
Dave Bunch
Dave Bunch Piano Service
& Certified PianoDisc Technician
members.aol.com/pdtek/piano.htm
Jim David
are tone and touch. PDtech gives a good analysis in general between the
overall tone difference between the Baldwin and Yamaha brand pianos. It is
unfortunate that the salespeople in two different stores told this customer
"each other's pianos are junk" (according to the original post). Today's
consumer is intelligent and that type of "salesmanship" gives all piano
salespeople a bad name. Dave, Baldwin does not weigh their keys in the
action because they use the "full blow action", which utilizes a longer
hammer shank and action parts, which in turn gives more leverage and
responsiveness to the touch (all wood parts, by the way). Baldwin does have
a plant in Juarez, Mexico, where the action parts are made and then shipped
to the two main plants in Conway and Truman, Arkansas. When I was at the
Baldwin plant, I saw the entire piano made before my eyes, (including the
hammer felts) with the exception of the action parts which come from
Juarez - I am never afraid to show and tell customers this). My advice to
this customer would be to go back to the two stores and listen again for
tone comparison.
Mary Anne David
Retail salesperson representing Baldwin, Knabe, Schimmel, Yamaha Clavinova
Dave Zappa
>
> The two most important criteria, in my opinion, with which to judge a piano
> are tone and touch. PDtech gives a good analysis in general between the
> overall tone difference between the Baldwin and Yamaha brand pianos. It is
> unfortunate that the salespeople in two different stores told this customer
> "each other's pianos are junk" (according to the original post).
Yes, Dave Bunch's analysis was quite on-target. I also believe that
Baldwin is a reasonable piano, I just feel that when you compare "apples
to apples" the Yamaha has a slight edge in construction. From there,
touch & tone are souly determined by the consumer. It is sad that the
two stores are using negative tactics rather than pointing out the
strengths of their pianos. However, once the first cannon is fired
often the battle begins...
> Today's
> consumer is intelligent and that type of "salesmanship" gives all piano
> salespeople a bad name.
Yes they are and yes it does.
> Dave, Baldwin does not weigh their keys in the
> action because they use the "full blow action", which utilizes a longer
> hammer shank and action parts, which in turn gives more leverage and
> responsiveness to the touch (all wood parts, by the way).
Baldwin does not weigh the keys because it saves money. They use a
slightly different wood for the keystick (sugarpine vs. spruce) for the
same reason. Full size actions have nothing to do with balance. After
growing up on Baldwin, and selling them side by side for many years with
Yamaha I can honestly say that a large majority of the players liked
Yamaha's action better. It was for a number of reasons: "quicker, more
even, lighter, easier" were all adjectives I heard consumers use when
describing Yamaha action. Leverage the only issue that Baldwin's full
size action addresses (except maybe long-term wear). It doesn't address
eveness of touch or repetition due to the fact that the keys aren't
precisely balanced (IMO of course). Fill the action full of ABS for all
I care if it plays good (Kawai certainly has been successful with that
agenda).
> Baldwin does have
> a plant in Juarez, Mexico, where the action parts are made and then shipped
> to the two main plants in Conway and Truman, Arkansas. When I was at the
> Baldwin plant, I saw the entire piano made before my eyes, (including the
> hammer felts) with the exception of the action parts which come from
> Juarez - I am never afraid to show and tell customers this).
Been there, done that as well. Were you aware that they are about to
consolidate the grands to Truman as well - laying off about 100
employees in Conway. Again, a cost containment measure. I'm not
bashing on Baldwin mind you, the grands will be built just fine in
Truman. I'm proud of Baldwin for maintaining their manufacturing for
the most part in the US. But they have to remain competitive, they have
a long tradition of making as good a piano as possible in a reasonably
affordable range. To make that possible you have to make sacrifices
somewhere.
> My advice to
> this customer would be to go back to the two stores and listen again for
> tone comparison.
>
Tone is one thing where I can honestly say I like the Baldwin better.
But touch has equal (if not slightly more in my case) priority. I could
have bought a 600 series, but I bought an M500 because I gave the touch
and construction edge to Yamaha. Your milage may vary....
l...@epix.net
dza...@SPAMTHISqni.com wrote:
> Tone is one thing where I can honestly say I like the Baldwin better.
> But touch has equal (if not slightly more in my case) priority. I could
> have bought a 600 series, but I bought an M500 because I gave the touch
> and construction edge to Yamaha. Your milage may vary....
>
> Dave
Dave,
Apparantly this discussion centers around Baldwin uprights, which I am not
that familiar with. But I do play a 1989 L, and I can tell you that the
action is just as quick and sensitive as any Yamaha grand I've played.
Regarding construction quality: I don't think you can make the generalization
that Yamaha is better built. In certain key areas, such as fit and finish,
string termination, bridge pinning and knotching, and uniformity of the plate
casting, and clarity of scale, Yamaha certainly has the edge (I assume
because all these tasks are fully automated in Japan).
But as to the massiveness and quality of the rim and bracing (a big issue
regarding tone), the durability of the trapwork, and the overall quality of
raw materials, especially the woods, Baldwin is clearly superior, IMO. The
scale designs on their Artist grands go back to the turn of the century, and
were conceived with wholely different purposes in mind than those of present
management.
I will certainly agree that Yamaha has more clarity (but much less sustain),
fewer false beats, and is easier to tune than a Baldwin, but I will insist
that the Baldwin has by far a more lyrical, and more singing tone than a
Yamaha. Again, I'm talking about six-foot grands here.
I'd hate to see Baldwin go out of business, but that seems to be the
direction they're headed in, if indeed they follow the same pattern that
other American piano brands have. That would leave only Steinway left as the
last full-line piano producer in the U.S. Sad. Very sad.
But here is a excerpt from an e-mail I received from Del Fandrich (who used
to head Baldwin's research) on this topic. We were discussing him making some
modifications to my piano. I don't think he'd mind me reprinting it (certain
things relating to my particular piano deleted):
_______________
I did work on the Model L for a while. I liked the piano very much, but the
company didn't. They wanted it to compete with the 6' 3" Yamaha, etc.,
pianos. And it wouldn't do that. The piano was designed in 1904 or 1905. It
has a relatively short and low tension scale. But it is nicely balanced and
(potentially, at least) is capable of wonderful dynamics. It was intended to
be a warm and melodic chamber piano. It was not intended to be a hard and
bright Yamaha. (You might guess that I'm not a fan of the "Yamaha Sound.")
Baldwin management insisted on putting hammers on the piano that were much
too hard for the scale. There is also a potential soundboard problem. It is
a problem that is not unique to the Baldwin L. It's shared with many pianos
of its type. The sustain rate is a bit fast in the 5th & 6th octaves. . .
The false beating problem is typical of the piano. The piano has what is
known as a "tuned duplex" plate design. In my opinion, these never work very
well and this one is particularly troublesome. The string termination angle
is not sufficient to properly terminate the speaking portion of the string
[in the highest part of the scale]. There's not a whole lot you can do about
it without doing some modifications to the plate.
They are not loud pianos, but they are very melodic. Wonderful clarity and
warmth.
______________
VOCE88
>that Yamaha is better built. In certain key areas, such as fit and finish,
>string termination, bridge pinning and knotching, and uniformity of the plate
>casting, and clarity of scale, Yamaha certainly has the edge (I assume
>because all these tasks are fully automated in Japan).
>
>But as to the massiveness and quality of the rim and bracing (a big issue
>regarding tone), the durability of the trapwork, and the overall quality of
>raw materials, especially the woods, Baldwin is clearly superior, IMO. The
>scale designs on their Artist grands go back to the turn of the century, and
>were conceived with wholely different purposes in mind
>than those of present
>management.
I must say that I agree with George on this point. Particularly when we are
speaking of the Artist series grands.
Richard Galassini
Cunningham Piano Co
Phila,. Pa.
1 (800) 394-1117
Dave Zappa
> >that Yamaha is better built. In certain key areas, such as fit and finish,
> >string termination, bridge pinning and knotching, and uniformity of the plate
> >casting, and clarity of scale, Yamaha certainly has the edge (I assume
> >because all these tasks are fully automated in Japan).
> >
> >But as to the massiveness and quality of the rim and bracing (a big issue
> >regarding tone), the durability of the trapwork, and the overall quality of
> >raw materials, especially the woods, Baldwin is clearly superior, IMO. The
> >scale designs on their Artist grands go back to the turn of the century, and
> >were conceived with wholely different purposes in mind
> >than those of present
> >management.
The generalization that Yamaha is better built is based on the
uniformity of the pianos I see come through the door. I know uniformity
is a bad word in our industry for some reason, but every manufacturer
has an "ideal" piano in mind they want to build, based on the design,
material and manufacturing execution. Yamaha hits that ideal on 90%+ of
their pianos. Steinway maybe 80%. Baldwin is lucky to hit 60%. I
can't speak for the past 18 months, but I've seen pianos come in with no
soundboard crown (even an SD no less), bridge pin cracks, horribly
prepped, and especially veneer problems (hopefully now that they are
shooting poly in Ark. that will go away). We never once "RA'd" (return
authorization) a Yamaha piano in the 10 years I sold both. We did send
back numerous Baldwins during that time (mostly Artist grands) and was
talked into keeping one or two others. So, the generalization that
Yamaha is better at construction of a piano is based on my experience
with both.
I agree with you 100% on the material issues. I never meant to
insinuate that the present management of Baldwin makes the piano a poor
candidate for rebuild. I might have a little arguement with the bracing
and trapwork being much superior to Yamaha, but the heavier rim is
clearly a better design in Baldwin. Why I am saying that Baldwin may be
a difficult piano to rebuild falls on two basic issues: the "Acu-Just"
hitch pins and the "floating" plate. Both of these items would require
a technician experienced in their adjustment. I would think it is more
difficult to get the bearing even and correct when dealing with
"adjustable" bearing items.
Just wanted to clarify
Don
I guess things change over the passage of time. Way back in the olden
days when I began taking piano lessons ( 1962 ) I played first on an
old upright and later on a stencil Henry F. Miller belonging to my
piano teacher. I thought it was a crappy piano. Now I find out the
H.F. Miller used to be a good name in pianos. I have been performing
professionally for over 30 years and playing every kind of piano and
PSO there is.
I always liked the Baldwin concert grands, in general, a little more
than most of the Steinways I ran across. This is "in general" because
there are always exceptions.
I also liked the Kawai and Yamaha grands except for the 9' concert
grands. I felt that they could not come close to a Steinway or
Baldwin concert grand.
Now, I hear all of these dispariaging words about Baldwin. Oh how it
hurts. When I moved to DFW in 1982, the Foat Wuuth Baldwin dealer had
a wonderful concert grand which I lusted after. But I did not have
the $18,000 required to take it home.
Maybe things were different back then.
D*
Recently described as:
"piano-bar-church music director-conductor-funeral pianist."
------------------------------------------------------------
www.calldon.com/shadow.htm
Remembering Shadow
July 1984 - November 13, 1997
A Tribute To The Sweetest, Most Perfect Dog In Heaven
Dave Zappa
> Now, I hear all of these dispariaging words about Baldwin.
I trust I am not the only source you are basing that on. I am but one
simple piano salesperson with the opinion that Baldwin ain't what it
used to be and that they are getting their tails kicked (mostly in the
consumer console stuff) by Yamaha. The grands are a totally different
story.
Faizal Ali
grands?
Faizal Ali (who's considering buying a baldwin grand)
Toronto
Dave Zappa wrote in message <36BCD1CD...@qni.com>...
Dave Zappa
>
> So just to be comletely clear, what do you think of the current Baldwin
> grands?
>
> Faizal Ali (who's considering buying a baldwin grand)
> Toronto
>
Good pianos that have a lower than average value-price relationship
IMO. Certainly there are some much better values on the market in that
price range in rebuilt Steinway, new Masons, Seiler, Schimmel, Chas.
Walter, Yamaha C3 & better, etc..