[CAUT] Steinway or Forgery?

[Fred Sturm]

On Apr 17, 2009, at 10:43 AM, Richard Brekne wrote:

> Live and let live I say... but be honest about it and leave all the  
> smearing of the <<other guy>> out of any discussion.

	I agree with these sentiments. I find it amazing how little it takes  
to set off a frenzy of Steinway bashing. I suppose we all have a beef  
or two, something we can legitimately criticize. For example, I think  
the factory guys need to learn to travel shanks better, and hang  
hammers more squarely - though that does make me into more of a  
magician when I correct the problem <G>.
	I don't think we need to make things up, though. Take Ed Foote's  
notion of how Steinway is making things more cheaply, exemplified by  
"plastic glue and microwaving" in the production of rims, for  
instance. Utter hogwash. The making of rims is probably the most  
archaic and inefficient part of the whole operation. A gang of six to  
eight guys come into the rim room with a stack of maple plies, plus  
the appropriate finish veneer. They run the plies individually through  
the jig that applies glue, with one of them brushing glue where there  
are any thin spots or voids. They carry the stack to the caul, and  
bend it around. They apply the various outer cauls, and the clamping  
jigs. Lots of evening out work, adjusting here and there, getting it  
to bend evenly around the curves. Tightening a bunch of clamping bolts  
by hand, finishing with an enormous torque wrench. The whole thing  
left to dry/cure for hours, usually over night. Maybe they sometimes  
do two a day per caul (if so, first thing in the morning and last  
thing at in the afternoon). Mostly one a day. Not a sign of microwaves  
anywhere. If there are any, they sure don't work very well, or they'd  
be able to take each rim off right away and start another.
	The question of why pianists are more comfortable with Steinway has a  
lot of aspects, but I think the most important one has to do with the  
company's commitment over many, many decades to having concert  
instruments available virtually everywhere. And the fact that they  
provide training for the technicians who service the C & A fleet. When  
you consider the size and output of the company, the C & A fleet and  
the training program are simply unbelievable. Yes, sure, there's been  
a lot of marketing, brand building, and so forth. But let's give  
credit where it is due. If Steinway didn't have its worldwide fleet of  
pianos, what would fill (would have filled) that void?
	When a pianist goes to a venue and it has a Steinway, there are  
reasonable chances it is either a C & A instrument, or cared for by  
someone with some training. This is not a perfect system, and  
certainly not all C & A pianos are equally good, nor are all the techs  
equally skilled. Some stage Steinways are dogs. But a pretty good  
majority are quite nice.
	Me, I find that the question of who prepped the piano is far more  
important than what name is on the decal. I've seen what Ron Overs  
does with a Samick belly and rim, what Darrel Fandrich does with  
Bohemia, just to name a couple examples.

	But I sure would like to see us lose this tendency to bash. Why? What  
good does it do you? Would we all be better off if S&S closed its  
doors? Why not think for a few minutes before sending that kind of  
diatribe out into public cyberspace?
Regards,
Fred Sturm
University of New Mexico
fssturm at unm.edu