If you can't afford a Steiway, which are the next best?

[Bill Kibby]

The trouble with all this that art is a matter of opinion, and every individual piano is as different as every musician's opinion. Steinways are certainly not everyone's favourite, and a lot depends on whether you are talking about new pianos. Old ones by one maker vary enormously as the models change, and then suffer from all the problems of getting older. The true "Baby Grands" are so short that they will never equal the tonal quality of a bigger grand, most are inferior to uprights. I have said in the past that some Yamaha grands of a few years ago seemed very average, but now, having played regularly on a brand new one, I doubt if anything could be better. You may choose the furniture, but the pianist has to choose the instrument.

[PianoGuy]

Yamaha.

[Barrie Heaton]

This may be personal choice but are Bechstiens, Bluthners, good purchases?
Thanks
Susan

Very good, especially Bluthners. However, they are all in the same price range of a Steinway what is your price range.

This is a bargain
Blüthner Style IVA 5'5" / 166cm Mahogany Satin Finish
£13,995.00

* New Soundboard
* New Wrest Plank
* Roller Action
* Ivory Keys

http://www.bluthner.co.uk/bluthner/usedpianos.html

Barrie,

[ricardo]

hi, I'm not sure if this thread is still active but I can give an opinion, having just made a decision after 2 months of looking!
After steinway and Fazioli, the German pianos seem to have the best reputation.
The great difficulty is getting your hands on some of these instruments - (eg. no August Forster in the UK of that size) but I tried nearly all, and found the Grotrian 6 foot 4 to have a beautiful tone and touch - personal taste of course!
Good luck richard

[PianoGuy]

Yes, but watch out for the heavy depreciation, especially on Forsters and Zimmermanns which are still shaking off their formerly shoddy East German reputations.

PG

[Bruce Hardy]

This is my first posting to the page and am anxious to share my experience with choice of piano. I purchased and rebuilt a Steinway in 1980 and was thrilled with it, but as my skill as a pianist grew, became increasingly unhappy with the loud metallic shrillness, even after voicing. Everyone else thought I was crazy, but I knew there had to be something more. When in a museum I played an eight foot Broadwood of 1890 vintage I knew I had come home. I now teach with a Broadwood 1895 and an Erard 1875, both over eight feet in length and both straight strung. I gave the Steinway to my daughter who loves it. To me it is a matter of tone vs volume, sound vs space.

[PianoGuy]

I now teach with a Broadwood 1895 and an Erard 1875, both over eight feet in length and both straight strung. I gave the Steinway to my daughter who loves it. To me it is a matter of tone vs volume, sound vs space.

Please come over to England and rescue us from a few more. I can immediately think of two that are going free to a good home.

[Bruce Hardy]

Thanks for your response Piano Guy, I detect a keen sense of humour which I like. Regarding my choice of straight strung vs Steinway, I must add that both have undergone complete rebuilds with new pins, strings and modern action. A costly and timely experiment, I know, but I love the results. Also one has to be careful regarding make, model and vintage. When complete, I was reminded of early studies in physics observing wave patterns caused by moving baffles in trays of water. With one baffle the waves were consistant and unbroken. With two baffles at angles they were disturbed and jumbled. I thought of the present position of the bass bridge and wondered if the same thing happens to the sound waves in the board. The clarity of sound in straight stringing was something I had not heard before.
ps...would love to hear more about the 'free to a good home'

[PianoGuy]

You're right in theory I am sure. I remember a fellow student conducting a similar experiment when I was at college with surprisingly good results, although the sound was somehow not quite "piano-like". The sustain that the old girl had in the bass was astounding, but the treble was weak and puny. I'm sure that with a fair amount of time, cash and expertise it could have been made to sound even more respectable. A new soundboard would also have been an advantage.

Still, I won't be trading in my Yamaha yet thanks!

As for the freebies, I have two or three Broadwood s/strungs and a Kirkman of similar construction that I wish would disappear from my tuning round. I'll let you know if my pleadings to their owners pays off.

Shipping is at your expense!

[Melodytune]

This is my first posting to the page and am anxious to share my experience with choice of piano. I purchased and rebuilt a Steinway in 1980 and was thrilled with it, but as my skill as a pianist grew, became increasingly unhappy with the loud metallic shrillness, even after voicing. Everyone else thought I was crazy, but I knew there had to be something more. When in a museum I played an eight foot Broadwood of 1890 vintage I knew I had come home. I now teach with a Broadwood 1895 and an Erard 1875, both over eight feet in length and both straight strung. I gave the Steinway to my daughter who loves it. To me it is a matter of tone vs volume, sound vs space.

Its very interesting to read and hear of our customers' opinions of what pianos they like and dislike and this is a perfect example of someone who clearly wasn't happy with their Steinway piano.

I also have a couple of old Broadwood straight strung pianos I wouldn't mind getting rid of, but equallly I have a couple of lovely grands one of which I've recommended for refurbishment.

[Bruce Hardy]

Thank you for your response Chris....I should say that I greatly admired the craftsmanship in my Steinway and its ability to fill an auditorium. However it was just too loud and insensitive and metalic. It overpowered me. It overpowered the house, and it was only a 6 ft. I often think that when overstringing was developed, there was no electronic amplification, and I seem to get the feeling from reading about the times that the race was on to develop a piano which would fill a big hall. Steinway succeeded and the rest is history; but I wonder if everybody was enamoured with the sound, or was it a matter of economics on the part of the builders and a matter of prestige on the part of the pianists. Sad, but the piano design has been the victim of so much meddling and fooling around, quite unlike the violin, which when perfected was left alone. Anyone in the UK think these thoughts have validity? Most Canadians think I'm a little off.

[Gill the Piano]

I have to say that I find the large Steinway grands a bit much in the average British house...my ex-Steinway mate and i have amicable bickering sessions about it, but they can set my fillings dancing when I get to the treble end! I do think they need a big room to accommodate their big sound. But then, everybody's different. i just know that if I had even the smallest Steinway grand in my music room (with its lid down!) my eardrums would probably rupture!

[Gill the Piano]

Me again! From the Musical Times, 1st January 1879.
"Manufacturers of English pianos are beginning to feel the effects of the foreign competition which assails them at all points; Mr.Bord flooding the country with his cheap pianettes,while the great house of Steinway leaves no stone unturned in order to gain a footing for their mighty 'grands'...

[Bruce Hardy]

FRom "Broadwood by Appointment" by D. Wainwright.....
At the bottom of pg. 228 is a quote by Karl Geringer: 'The tone on the over-strung piano has not, however, the limpidity of the older instruments.'
I think it is agreed that overstringing facilitates a great volume of sound, but what about quality. Is it just my imagination, or does anyone else find a purity and clarity of sound in straight stringing? Those of you in the UK have an advantage of comparison over me as there are so many more older instruments there. Bear in mind, that we have to compare over-stringing with a straight strung which is in top notch condition.

[Gill the Piano]

I tuned a GINROMOUS Brinsmead concert grand of 1859 which had been rescued from a potential fiery fate (which would have been a pity, because other than one little bit of veneer, it was immaculate)and that was straight strung. Allowing for the fact that the hammers were bu- er, very worn, the tone was very rounded and yes, limpid would be the word. The gent who'd rescued it had it straddling TWO rooms, but was also using it as a drawing board, with the plans for the plane he was restoring blu-tacked to the (open) lid. I also remember thinking that if I broke a string on it, it'd take the best part of a roll of wire to replace it...as I sat at the keyboard, the end of the piano was only just visible in the distance!

[Melodytune]

The original concept of overstringing was to enable piano manuafcturers to build smaller (in terms of height or length - for uprights and grands respectively) pianos but maintain a good length of stringing at the same time, hence giving as good or even better tone than that of its straight strung counterparts. The string tension on overstrung pianos is usually higher especially in the bass bringing the strings closer to their breaking point.

From experience while I live (or love - in some cases) the tone produced by an old straight strung grand in good condition for its depth and clarity, I could rarely say the same for upright pianos. I do have a number of straight strung uprights on my rounds which are adequate, some are fine pianos in my opinion.

There are few piano specialists who will restore a straight strung piano unless its something like a Bechstein where there's a good chance that they can recover the cost.

[Bruce Hardy]

Thank you for your thoughts Chris. Certainly overstringing in uprights enables a longer string, but I'm not too sure about the grands. One day I'll make comparative measurements. I've always thought that overstringing was primarily to position the bass bridge behind the treble bridge to allow for a longer bass bridge and to position the bass string down- bearing more towards the centre of the board. Subsequently one is able to build in a better and stronger crown with greater volume as the main result. But now that I think about it, any good straight strung bass bridge bearing I've measured has been more than adequate. Any thoughts?

[tuna]

Hi, I tune an old Broadwood concert grand which is housed in a private school here in Ireland. They don't use it much now as they bought a new C7 last year which is a lovely beast.
The broadwood has FOUR strings to each note in the top two treble sections. This is the only piano I have seen with 'quadchords'. That doesn't sound right to me but if two strings form a bi-chord, and three a tri-chord, why not? I was just relieved I had more than one tuning wedge with me at the time, or i'd have been a little buggered!

[PianoGuy]

Don't tell me there's more than one of the heaps!

I tune one of those monstrosities too! The extra string's benefit is completely outweighed by the fact that there's more surface area for the fat little hammer to strike, and the sound is weaker than if there were trichords!

Absolute rubbish.

I wonder what Broadwood's designers were on at times.

[Bruce Hardy]

Hi Tuna....quadchord sounds pretty accurate to me. Another version might be quadrachord. I was really fascinated to hear about the Broadwood. Would you mind telling me what the framing arrangement is like? I'd love to know if it's straight or overstrung, how many bars, an oblique bar, or barless; single or double escapement action. Do you think there's a chance they might retire it and sell it? If so, would you mind letting me know?
Many thanks
Bruce

[PianoGuy]

Can't speak for Tuna, but the one I tune is iron framed and slightly overstrung; the frame similar in design to a standard 7'6"ish " Broadwood of around 1890. Casework is typical of that period with double folded fall and that very pretty "Broadwood" music desk.

Action from recollection is an early double escapement but is definitely fitted with with the Broadwood system of comb and long centrepin for each section (so you'd want to get rid of that, right?). The quadrachords are mercifully limited to the top two sections, and as you'd expect, the string diameters are much reduced from those of a standard trichord.

The system is ridiculously flawed. The hammers are significantly wider than normal and their impact is spread over a greater surface area across four thinner, shorter strings so they sound completely puny. They're also rubbish to tune. If you're seriously that interested I'll see if the current owners will sell theirs, but I'm sure you'll be disappointed unless you're primarily a Broadwood collector or enthusiast.

[Bruce Hardy]

Hi Piano Guy...Thanks for the info re Broadwood quadra strung. FRom your description and advice, I don't think I'll go there. Although a Broadwood enthusiast, I've only room for what really sounds good. However, I'd jump at the chance for one of their old Wall Climbers. Know of any?

[PianoGuy]

Hardly 'next best' to a Steinway though eh Ralph?

If I wasn't so charitable and good natured I might think I'm smelling a bit of pork luncheon meat at this point. Anyway, German designed possibly, but made in China aren't they?

[courtesy]

I was just reading this topic and our family used to own an old Victoria piano 20 years ago which was Straight Strung (I remember because I used to look inside the lid). I currently have a 1930s piano which is overstrung and one of the first things that struck me was how loud it was (despite being a shorter piano than the old straight one). I personally find it hard when trying to play pianissimo.