Sohmer

[Lynn Rosenberg]

I was told by a technician friend that the industry has had a problem since
the 1920s.
Pianos have been to well built, and as long as pianos last, the industry
can't survive.  %70 pianos sold are used.  How can an industry keep up if
70% sold are used.  Also, pianos are getting terribly expensive.  The
average person can't afford to spend $4000 or more for a piano.  If the
industry is to survive, pianos will get cheaper, cheaper, and cheaper, to
survive.  Do you think the industry is dying, because of the above
mentioned, and electronics, and if so how much longer?? Lynn
----- Original Message -----
From: Delwin D Fandrich <pianobuilders@olynet.com>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2000 12:08 AM
Subject: Re: Sohmer


>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Lynn Rosenberg" <Lynn@eznet.net>
> To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
> Sent: October 20, 2000 9:06 AM
> Subject: Re: Sohmer
>
>
> > Hi Del. Why don't these manufacturers take all this into consideration
> when
> > they design pianos??? I've been told about pianos you make, and have
heard
> > nothing but good comments about them.  Why doesn't Steinway correct
> they're
> > problems concerning the 1098??? The us, and foreign piano makers aut to
> > start to take in consideration they're scale designs in making pianos.
> Lynn
> > Rosenberg
> >
> ----------------------------------
>
> Several reasons, actually.
>
> The most obvious is that many U.S. companies lost the skills and knowledge
> required to create new piano scales (and by 'scale' I mean the whole of
the
> beast, not just the speaking lengths of the strings).  For the most part
> research and development went out during the 1930s.  There are, of course,
> some well-known exceptions, but on the whole there is a fear of tampering
> with the unknown.  And the acoustic technology of the piano is an unknown
to
> most of those building it.
>
> In other cases, such as with the Steinway 1098 you mention, there is a
> difference of opinion as to whether or not there is a problem with the
> design.  Those of us who have had to work on them over the years have one
> opinion, obviously the company has another.  I look at this particular
> design and see a great deal of unrealized potential.  This has to be one
of
> the most solidly built vertical pianos on the market today.  In my
> opinion -- and keep in mind, this is only my opinion -- the scale, plate
and
> string terminations could easily be altered to eliminate those aspects of
> the design that are most offensive to the tuner/technician while
> substantially improving the performance.  Steinway, on the other hand, is
> apparently quite happy with the design as it is.  Keep in mind that some
> companies have a strong vested interest in preserving traditions.  At some
> point it may well become more important than enhancing performance.  At
> least they have chosen to produce the design, essentially unchanged, for
> some decades now.  (Other industries do this as well.  Consider how long
it
> has taken Ford to rid itself of the 'Twin I-Beam' suspension, an idea only
> marginally better than the solid axle it replaced.)  I suppose as long as
> enough people buy it to make it profitable it will continue on as is.
>
> And herein lies what I see as the core problem.  The piano industry as a
> whole is largely content to continue producing instruments in the same
basic
> pattern as long as people are willing to keep on buying them.  There is
> intense competition in the manufacturing arena -- i.e., in how to build
them
> faster and cheaper and, occasionally, even better -- but little in
evolving
> the instrument to higher levels of performance.  In my view as long as
this
> remains the case piano sales will continue to slowly decline.
>
> But then, I've said all this already.  Check the Journal several years
back
> for my article, "If It Ain't Broke, Break It!"
>
> Regards,
>
> Del
>
>
>
>