Quality in Pianos

[Richard Brekne]

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
List

Ok.. the recent two threads on advice about buying a piano has left me a
big paffed about the seeming equality in how many techs range pianos in
terms of quality, sound, and durability.

I personally operate with 4 "classes" of pianos. I arrive at this from
an admitedly somewhat subjective evaluation process, yet I strive to
include as much objectivity as my humanity allows for. Evaluation of
sound is of course  tough, at least above a certain level of quality.
Things like tuning stability and action quality are much easier to
observe, as is basic construction. How a piano holds up over time (both
with and without proper sevice) is also something rather easy to observe
over time.

In that light I find that I would place three pianos without any further
consideration in the top class. Both Steinways, and the Bosendorfer. I
would be tempted to place Bechstein in this class as well, but something
holds me back just a bit.

The second class I place pianos like Bechstein, Yamaha, Bluther, Boston,
Grotrian, Sauter, Schimmel, Seiler, Baldwins and a few others. Pretty
much in that order as well. These are all good pianos, well made in most
regards and will hold up well over time. But all lack something or
another (some more then others) to allow me to put them in the same
class as the three mentioned above. The Bechstein, Yamaha and Bluthner
come closest tho.. especially the Bechstein.

In the third class, which is where I personally draw the line for
minimal quality that should be allowed, I place pianos like Samick,
Young Chang, Petrof, August Forster, some of the cheaper Yamahas and
Kawaiis (I see some CX5's over here) and  several others. Typical for
all of these are that they have lots of assorted problems that irritate
the patooties out of me. They all have their ways of cutting corners or
choosing where to do shoddy work and they all have their strengths.
Petrof is perhaps my favorite amoung these because of a rather pleasing
general sound picture, and because of the fact that one can really
accomplish alot by ripping apart the action and putting it back
together. (Almost any competent tech can make a bit improvement on
Petrofs by doing this) I dont like the bass strings on Petrofs, but
those can be changed. Worse is all the false beats in the treble and the
all to often lousey pinblock work found in these instruments. Samicks
are also a piano I recomend often in this class. Pretty solid, really
clean sound, nice scale and good bass strings. Pretty stable. In fact I
would be tempted to place them lowest in class two had it not been for
an observation about what happens to these over time. I find time and
time again 12 - 15 year old Samicks that have just gone dead sound wise.
I am not sure why this happens as it probably has to do with soundboard
concerns that are outside my scope of knowledge. They just develop this
"thuddy" quality over the whole piano. Not all of them mind you.. just
enough of them that I cant get myself to range them better then class 3.

Then there are the non piano pianos. Class 4 I do not recommend to
anyone, advise against, and personally would like to see forbidden.
These are pianos that come out of the factory with so many serious flaws
that I cant for the life of me understand how anyone who knows anything
about pianos can in good concious accept them as viable instruments in
any sense of the word. These are pianos that come with really loose
tuning pins, actions that are falling apart, soundboards that crack and
pull away from ribs and rims before they get to the store, pinblocks
that delaminate or have horrible workmanship with regard to
installation, etc., etc., etc., ad absurdum. You know the lot and I wont
mention any of them. These kinds of "pianos" are clearly substandard and
represent pretty blatant fraud to my mind of thinking.

I would be interested in hearing how other techs roughly classify
pianos. I was, mildly said, supprised to see the assistant director of
the PTG annual convention seemingly throw Steinways and Young Changs in
the same "box" as being... "acceptable".

    "All of the brands that have been mentioned are quite
    reputable as are such names as Seiler, Schimmel, Baldwin, Young
Chang, etc."

I am reasonably sure he didnt mean to say the Young Chang is just as
fine an instrument as Steinway, tho it could easily be misread to that
affect.

--
Richard Brekne
Associate PTG, N.P.T.F.
Bergen, Norway


---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/50/60/79/93/attachment.htm

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--