Agreed: I have been impressed by improved quality control over the last five years or so. It does remain to be seen how they stand up under pressure. I'm happy to experiment with a wee bit of the public's money ;-). Actually, this was a pretty clear cut choice in terms of the parameters of the process. If they don't hold up, they disappear from the acceptable list. It was a considered gamble to put them on that list, but I have been favorably impressed at how those under my care in private homes have held up. And I have heard positive reports from a couple colleague cauts. Regards, Fred --On Wednesday, February 18, 2004 7:50 PM +0100 Richard Brekne <Richard.Brekne@grieg.uib.no> wrote: > Fred Sturm wrote: > >> ... For those curious, we decided on 3 Yamaha P-22's >> and a Petrof 131. A lot of trouble for 4 uprights, but worthwhile over >> the long haul, I think, in establishing a process. Next year we'll enter >> the realm of grands, and it will start to matter more. >> Regards, >> Fred Sturm >> University of New Mexico >> _______________________________________________ >> > > Fred... I'd love to keep posted on how the Petrof holds up in comparison > to the Yamahas. Petrof, which basically has a nice sound, has a real bad > reputation over here for lots of shody workmanship... but these past few > years have made a marked improvement in their quality control. So it > would be interesting to hear how you feel one of their new instruments > hold up under hard use. > > Cheers > RicB > > _______________________________________________ > caut list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC