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

[Kendall Ross Bean]

Jeff~

Excellent points. Thanks for your thoughts on this, which remind us all that
nothing is truly simple! -Also, that we need marketing: without it, few
things would probably be sold. But it's like oil: very slippery, especially
when applied indiscriminately. -Watch your step. Rather than the unvarnished
truth, (which I would prefer), salespeople often serve you a little truth
with your varnish. Yes, sales and marketing people often will say all sorts
of things on impulse, or to try and make a sale, whether it's third- or
fourth-hand information, true or not. 

In recent years I have been driving Japanese cars, mostly Hondas (Acuras)
and Toyotas, simply because they seemed to have a much better frequency of
repair record than the American built cars I had been driving. I think much
of the driving public would agree. I actually have done much of the repair
work on my own cars over the years (including replacing engines and
tramsmissions), but some years ago decided I would much rather be working on
pianos (much cleaner, generally, and usually less frustrating, although
there are significant exceptions...)

Yet Japanese cars are not an unmixed blessing. For example, the steel is
softer, generally. (Ever leaned against one and had it oilcan? I wonder if
they would hold up as well as U.S. built cars (or Volvos!) in a crash.) As
you hint, whether it's Japanese pianos or cars, I suspect the "consistency"
may be being achieved with materials that may not of the highest quality or
most durable (I think that is the general perception as well). But also I
think as I view the piano or car lines, it also depends on the price/quality
level of the piano or car. Naturally an over-$100,000. Japanese-built
Concert grand is going to get far better construction and better materials
(-they are also made in a different facility) -than the under-$10,000 grand.

Like you, I have also noticed, in recent years, a definite inconsistency in
the quality of recent Japanese cars. (Again, it seems to depend on the model
and brand. Cheaper cars and pianos all seem to suffer from the same neglect
or lack of quality. I stopped driving Mazdas and Nissans (I can't speak for
Subaru or Isuzu) because they just didn't seem as well built as the Toyotas
and Hondas. My favorite car is my current 1995 Acura Integra GSR (which was
built in Japan). Like Steinway grands, it may last a long time. It seems
quite durable. So far, 103,000 miles with only routine maintenance. The
hatchback is great for transporting actions.

Perhaps as some suspect, the Japanese automakers may be "resting on their
laurels". I think it is human nature to want to do this after having
struggled for, fought for, and won a hard-earned reputation. So we do have
to look at Steinway, Yamaha, Honda, and General Motors all in that same
light, because I believe they all tend to do this at times.

Many of the Toyota Camrys, for example, have been built in Kentucky, I
believe, (I got this off of the doorframe sticker of our cars) and I was not
exactly pleased with the quality of the last one we bought, in comparison to
the first one (a 1999 vs a 1990) The doors rattled annoyingly, and a host of
other minor but irritating problems caused us to keep taking it back to the
dealer. Ironically, the earlier, 1990 model was also built in Kentucky, but
it was about the most trouble-free car we had ever owned. We drove it for 15
years, and finally sold it to my brother, who was still very excited to get
it. It was a great car. The Camry reputation was apparently established on
this model(as well as earlier ones). But then what happens?

The same things seems to happen with high profile piano names. Steinway and
Yamaha, and Kawai all have flagship, expensive models that they use to sell
the smaller, less expensive, or lower quality pianos (Basic marketing).
Yamaha and Kawai still put their Yamaha or Kawai logos on all different
qualities of pianos in their respective lines. Steinway is apparently more
concerned about "brand dilution," and so puts different names on different
qualities of pianos (Steinway, Boston, Essex). The Steinway grands, for
example (not the  Boston or Essex, but those which have the actual Steinway
name on the fallboard) are definitely more of a homogeneous or "single
quality line" -in comparison to either Yamaha or Kawai, who are definitely
"Multiple quality" in their grand lines. That's where it gets confusing,
because as also has been stated elsewhere in this thread, most of the public
really doesn't know the difference between a C3, a CFIII, and a GC-1. (I
think the model numbers are actually designed to be confusing.)

I also tend to agree with you that, for whatever reason, Yamahas and Kawais
haven't (so far) seemed to hold up as well over the years as Steinways. But
I am not certain why this is, or if it is universally true of all the
different models, including the newer vis-a-vis the older ones, of any of
these brands.

No, consistency isn't everything. But apparently it means a lot to many
people, who are tired of unpredictability, or unreliability. When they buy
something, they want it to work from the get-go, not have to wait 2 to 5
years for it to settle into where they expected it to be when they bought
it. They don't understand this philosophy (and I can't blame them) where you
buy something new and then you are expected to do additional work on it and
pour additional money into it that should have been done at the factory...
(or in Steinways case, perhaps, at the dealers...) 

And how much of a factor in all this is the additional voicing and prep that
the different sizes (or should we say higher vs. lower profiles) of pianos
get? For example, some years ago when we were on the Steinway Tour, we were
informed that, at that time, S,M's, and L's got 20 additional hours of
additional "touch and tone" work, the B's 40 hours, and the D's 80 hours (at
the factory). (And the Concert Division instruments much more) But it makes
total sense from an economic standpoint. The highest visibility instruments
get the most prep. Simple economics. No reason to put all those extra hours
in the model S that's just going to sit unused in someone's living room...
Probably Yamaha and Kawai also embrace this philosophy. 

The lesser quality pianos of all these brands all bounce off the reputation
of the expensive flagship models. Quality on all these brands, including the
flagship model concert grands, goes up or down with the years, and different
management, and marketing philosophies. But people still spend the money,
and buy because of the name and the reputation, regardless of the peaks and
dips in quality.

And then (only after they've bought the piano!) they ask their piano
technician or pianist friends what they think!  ;-)

By the way, if you believe Steinway has always been a stable, profitable
company, there is a great book you may want to read if you haven't already:
Steinway and Sons, by Richard K. Lieberman. He had access to (is director
of)the LaGuardia and Wagner Archives, which house the Steinway collection. I
love the book because it also talks a lot about the technical, evolutionary
and construction aspects of the piano, and pinpoints when critical changes
in the design or construction process occurred, and who was responsible, as
well as many other subjects of great interest. But most importantly, he
talks about the families, and the all-too-human aspect of the Steinway
endeavor and empire. 

~Kendall 

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Tanner [mailto:tannertuner at bellsouth.net] 
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 7:17 AM
To: caut at ptg.org
Subject: Re: [CAUT] "All Steinway" -What does it really mean...


----- Original Message -----
From: "Kendall Ross Bean" <kenbean at pacbell.net>
To: <caut at ptg.org>
Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2008 4:29 PM
Subject: [CAUT] "All Steinway" -What does it really mean...


> Is Steinway great truly because of merit, or just marketing? Or is it a 
> sort
> of slippery combination of both. -You tell me.

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