[CAUT] "All Steinway" -What does it really mean...

[David Love]

Those big three bozos from Detroit will be pleased to hear that at least one
person sees that the problem with American cars can be boiled down to
marketing and perception--though I'm not sure that will be enough to wrestle
25 billion to help boost their overblown salaries and keep the fleet of
corporate jets.  But that's another issue.  

I don't think Yamaha and Kawai have marketed their products as being
superior to Steinway--at least I haven't seen that kind of advertising.
Their popularity has everything to do with price and predictability.  I'm
also not convinced that Steinway has the upper hand in terms of longevity.
After all, if they felt that confident, why do they only offer a 5 year
warranty?  Properly maintained and in a reasonably benign environment both
are capable of surviving well (or not).  In terms of serviceability (one
other measure of quality), Yamaha and Kawai have it hands down.  The ability
to purchase manufactured and assembled parts which can be installed directly
into an existing instrument is a strong selling point for institutions (and
perhaps individuals) who can't necessarily afford the additional costs
associated with custom jobs every time you need to replace a set of hammers
and shanks.

Steinway's appeal, in my view, has to do with their tonal concept that was
captured best and produced more consistently earlier in the century.  That
concept of low tension scales, light weight soundboards, heavy rims, light
and soft hammer, produced a warm, slightly dark, rich tone that people
responded to (warts, and model D--which is something quite different,
notwithstanding).  Yamaha and Kawai (two name two) have a different concept
and a design which lends itself to a very different tonal character.  Less
appealing to me personally but what they do, they do very well and I
understand why some people prefer it even if I don't (though I do prefer
Yamaha uprights to Steinway uprights which, to me, are generally very
disappointing, not to mention expensive).  The current iteration of the
Steinway piano seems somewhat more of a hybrid of thoughts as if they feel
the pressure of the competition that seems to want to produce big, bright,
loud pianos.  I think this confusion has not been to their benefit.  

Steinway still is a bit of an anomaly in terms of their tonal model.  There
isn't a lot of competition in terms of tonal models that are similar to
theirs.  Yamaha, Kawai, Bechstein, Bosendorfer, even Hamburg Steinway, for
example, favor a higher tension, heavier board, harder hammer type of sound.
This, unfortunately, seems to be the current trend.  There are some European
manufacturers that are close to putting all the components of lower tension
and warmer tone together but too many of them are married to the hard hammer
idea that is anathema to the low tension, lightweight soundboard concept.
Charles Walter with the new Fandrich belly design is one that does match up
to the Steinway model well.  The company simply now needs to redefine who
and what they are really competing against and follow through with the
hammer and factory preparation that Del designed the piano for. 

I think I've digressed enough.  

David Love
www.davidlovepianos.com


There is one intangible that is being left out of this discussion.  We must 
remember that Steinway has been a stable, profitable company longer than any

other company in this discussion. It has been there when others have folded,

and it was there, at least in the minds and perception of Americans, long 
before any of the other manufacturers being mentioned entered the American 
piano market.

Longevity is a large part of reliability, at least in the minds of 
consumers. This lends more to merit than to marketing.

But, there is nothing wrong with good marketing, too.  Toyota and the other 
Japanese automobile companies have done a superb job of making their product

seem superior to American cars, when they really haven't been for at least 
the last 15, perhaps as many as 20 years.  There was that short period in 
the 1970s and early 80s where they brought in cheaper, more fuel efficient 
automobiles and created the myth that that meant superior.  Yamaha and 
Kawai, likewise have capitalized on similar untruths in marketing, promoting

their bottom of the line instruments as superior to Steinway, Baldwin etc., 
using the simple marketing strategy that they are more "consistent" (factory

finished), irrespective of the reality that the life expectancy is a 
fraction of those they are competing against.

So, this argument goes both ways.
Jeff Tanner