1969 Steinway L CBS?

[Greg Torres]

FWIW...

My latest and perhaps my last experience with Steinway parts was not a good
one. I did a partial action rebuild recently for a customer's 'M' because of
bad verdigree which consisted of hammers, shanks/flanges and whipens . The
customer insisted on genuine Steinway parts. As there was (and I believe
still is) a weird factory schedule going on at the time (last November) I
was not able to receive the pre-hung set of hammers and shanks they offered
so I had to go with separate hammer and shank/flange sets. The quality of
the hammers was awful IMO and the average difference between the hammer bore
and shank diameter was so great that the hammers literally rocked on the
shanks as much as 7-8 degrees. I sent this first set of hammers and shanks
back and when the second sets came back the hammers were even worse quality
than the first and the bore/shank diameter was the same. For example, the
thickness of the reinforcement felt on the extreme treble hammers was about
1/8" compared to the original hammers which were about 1/32" thick. These
hammers were more like sponges! I had to literally saturate these hammers in
hardner.

Then I got a call from Steinway because they received my returned parts and
said that there was nothing wrong with the "fit" ....WTF? When I gave them
the specs of the original hammer bore they said that the loose fit is normal
and that the factory can only bore their hammers to that of what I received,
so if I didn't like this loose a fit then either send them back (again, I
lose money on my time, shipping and insurance, etc) or use polyurethane
glue...

Because of time constraints and an increasing monetary loss I wound up using
these crappy parts and polyurethane glue, you know, the kind that expands to
fill gaps...

I will not ever buy genuine Steinway parts again unless the customer
absolutely insists. And then I certainly will charge a hell of a lot more
money for repairs. Also, I got a call back from the client a few days ago
still wanting more brilliance in the treble...so I have to go back next week
and try more hardener or perhaps (yikes!!) different hammers...

BUT, I will end this rant by saying that the quality of the original
Steinway parts was very very good, except for the verdigree problem. I saved
them with thoughts of rebushing them perhaps. But I have heard that the
verdigree will eventually come back even by doing this...

Best,
Greg

PS If anyone can recommend suppliers of substitute (read: better?)
hammers/parts for Steinways I am all ears...Thanks


----- Original Message -----
From: <Kdivad@AOL.COM>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2002 9:58 AM
Subject: Re: Re: 1969 Steinway L CBS?


> As a technician who works on a lot of Steinways I find it amazing that we
can not even discuss the problems at Steinway without it being called
condemnation or bashing. I like Steinways but they are not my master, if
there are problems that a lot of us have run into why not discuss them. They
become hard to discuss when as soon as you bring one up the Steinway posse
jumps all over you. As Terry stated he has much respect for Steinway, which
shows the pressure to preface our criticisms. We discuss the problems of a
lot of piano manufacturers but none of them bring up the defenses like
Steinway, though Yamaha is building momentum (not including grey pianos).
Most of the posse members will choose to ignore or dismiss the facts behind
some of Steinway criticisms.
>
> David Koelzer
> DFW


> In a message dated Sat, 11 May 2002 8:33:55 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
"Farrell" <mfarrel2@tampabay.rr.com> writes:
>
> >Comments below:
> >
> >Terry Farrell
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Richard Brekne" <Richard.Brekne@grieg.uib.no>
> >To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
> >Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2002 6:13 AM
> >Subject: Re: 1969 Steinway L CBS?
> >
> >
> >> Farrell wrote:
> >>
> >> > I have yet to run into a brand Y piano that regulates its own
dampers!
> >> > From the standpoint of a technician, I am not crabbing about brand X.
> >> > I am simply stating a general observation regarding how they hold up
> >> > over the years compared to some other pianos, most notably brand Y.
> >> > From the standpoint of the consumer, having purchased a new brand X
> >> > vertical before getting into this field, I am indeed crabbing. And I
> >> > got something to crab about! ;-0 With good intent throughout, Terry
> >> > Farrell
> >>
> >> Hmmm... so you owned a Steinway upright that went bad.... for reasons
> >> not completely understood to us others
> >
> >Yes, I bought a new 1098 about five years ago. I don't think "went bad"
is correct. If it "went bad", it occurred before Steinway sold it to me.
IMHO, it was made bad (1/4" reverse crown with lots of downbearing?).
> >
> >> ... you had some bad experience in
> >> dealing with their service department as well ?? (seem to remember you
> >> saying something about this a while back.. am I wrong ?)
> >
> >IMHO, very bad, rude ("you'll get used to that dinging noise"),
unsatisfactory (to put it mildly). Yes, this has been addressed in the past.
> >
> >> And from this
> >> and from your experience base you feel justified in condemning what the
> >> vast majority of pianists clearly recognize as the best sounding and
> >> playing instrument available for purchase these past 120 years or so.
> >
> >This aspect of this thread started out addressing vertical pianos from
the 1950s, 60s and 70s. I am only speaking of vertical pianos. MHO is based
in part on my 1098 that had serious defects and they were unwilling to fix
properly, but mostly MHO is based on the group of maybe 20 or 30 Steinway
verticals that I have run across over the past few years while servicing
pianos. Almost every one (and I can't recall one that didn't) had some
portion (some, multiple items) of a combination of cracked bridges, lots of
excessive string noise, poor hammer alignment (and other action components),
way out of regulation, poor string terminations, poorly performing dampers -
the type of things that one sees while tuning and lead one to feel that the
piano is quite worn out for its age. Yamaha verticals that I see from this
era are mostly in very good condition, with few if any of the aforementioned
problems, or at least to a significantly less degree.
> >
> >Again, I am strictly speaking to my own observations. Who knows, maybe
the brand Y are in such good condition because they are miserable to play
and sound bad so no one plays them, while brand X sounds so nice and plays
great so that everyone plays it day and night. I don't know that to be the
case though.
> >
> >Except for the few specific and well documented problems some Steinway
grand pianos exhibit (verdigris, Teflon action centers, poor action
geometry), I have much respect for their grand pianos.
> >
> >> I know people who CHOOSE not to buy a BMW..... not because they dont
> >> think of it as a good car... but because its tempermental and needs
lots
> >> of looking after. Then I also know people who think BMW's are lousy
> >> cars..... because they are tempermental....
> >
> >Well, I guess if you want a piano that is often not quite working well,
and that has ".....faults in each one that can be discovered and cherished
over the years", then go for it! :-)
> >
> >Again, all this seems to be clear from my observations based on a few
tens of pianos. I'm not a statistician. Perhaps that is not enough of a
sampling. If not, ignore everything I've said. You may choose that route
anyway! ;-)
> >
> >Terry Farrell
> >
> >> --
> >> Richard Brekne
> >> RPT, N.P.T.F.
> >> Bergen, Norway
> >> mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no
> >> http://home.broadpark.no/~rbrekne/ricmain.html
> >>
>
>