I was surprised by Larry Fine's ranking of the Hamburg Steinway over the New York Steinway. While I find the Hamburg to be clearer/crisper, I do not prefer its sound over the richness and greater complexity offered by the New York model. I also find the attack on the Hamburg model to be quite abrupt at all volumes (which is something I have noticed about German/Austrian pianos in general), whereas the New York model's attack is gentle when a softer touch is employed (which in my opinion is far more desirable). Is this a general trend, or does this have more to do with the specific instruments I heard?

It has a lot to do with the finish. New York pianos are a lot nicer in that respect nowadays since there has been greater cooperation between the factories, as well as Hamburg personnel moving to New York.

FWIW, while I applaud Larry Fine for the huge amount of work he does, he doesn't know everything. Buy what you like, not what he likes.

Assuming you prefer the NY sound to Hamburg, and realize and don't care that the exterior finishing of the Hamburg is much higher (of course the sound and touch should take priority), realize that the best NY Steinways are just as good as the Hamburgs. However, the percentage of very good NY Steinways is much lower than the percentage of very good Hamburg Steinways. That is, the Hamburg consistency is much higher. Since the preparation is very different (Hamburg sound mature when brand new, NY sound needs months of breaking in to become mature), it will be much more difficult to ascertain whether that NY Steinway will bloom into a great one.

I did notice quite a bit of variation among the different NY Steinways I sampled at the showroom. Some were merely OK, while others were just incredible.

A simple understated exterior is almost preferable to me, so I have no problem with that.

Agreed. However, rubbed lacquer is always more susceptible to damage, but to me it's much more aesthetically pleasing in my home than shiny polyester would be. It's akin to the French "little black dress", if you will. Very understated and elegant. On stage and for institutional use, however, poly wins every time for it's durability and eye-catching looks.




I don't think that's true anymore, especially in the last 3-4 years. All of the newest pianos from New York that I have experienced are highly consistent. Some stand out above others (which will be true of any high end brand), but no duds.




Depends on your tech. If you have a great tech from day one to prepare a new New York Steinway, the piano's potential will be much more obvious. And they only get better with playing.

Cheers!

Last time I was at Steinway Hall I thought the pianos ranged tonally from poor to excellent.

Fine's rankings are not based on how the pianos were 3-4 years ago and are based on numerous tech reports beside his own personal opinion.

I don't think the main reason for NY Steinway's lower rating is the quality of the lacquer finish, although I do not think it is as good as the lacquer finish on FH rebuilds, for example.

In my experience, most of the pianos played at Carnegie Hall were Hamurg Steinways.

The problem with Fine's rankings is that he is collecting views primarily from technicians. However, it is pianists that play these instruments and pianists tend to have different criteria to technicians.

In practice the Hamburg and New York Steinways are rarely found side by side to compare on a true like for like basis (i.e. both new pianos or both old pianos of similar age).

I play a Hamburg D day to day. It is a pretty excellent instrument. I have played a few pretty excellent New York D's as well. They are a bit different (I usually feel the NY ones sound warmer) but the similarities these days are far more dominant than the differences in my opinion. I would be happy with a well prepped model of either.

As they feed different markets, in many ways the differences are academic.

Arnie, the differences which you noticed come thru pretty well in this Hamburg/NY A/B which is sometimes cited on PW.

JBB's point about preparation is well taken.

I have noticed and agree with this, too. The German models are less distinguished from other European brands, whereas NY models sound more unique. I think the difference is the softer hammer which offers a larger tonal pallette IMO.

By the way, when I referred to "finish", I just didn't mean the difference in laquer vs. polyester. In fact, I heard some NY pianos can now be done in polyester. The Hamburg has much more external craftsmanship (music stand, interior, exterior, all over). The soft hammer in the NY will offer possibilities for pianists wishing to use a certain tonal palette, and the Hamburg hammers will similarly appeal to others. Just keep two things in mind: the polyester finish takes quite a bit less time to apply than the laquer, though the Hamburg piano takes a lot longer to produce than the NY, and I believe the Hamburg is less "forgiving" of certain things so if you practice on it regularly, you may find your technique improving. Some may regard that as a downside in performance, however.

Sure can! The work is done by Cavalieri Finishing; they have been doing some C&A D's for several years, but now you can order pianos with their finish. The poly they use is very high quality and much more durable than much of what's out there.



Once again, I think you are confusing the qualities of the regular finishes with workmanship. My Steinway (see profile), which I've had for nearly two years now, leaves nothing to be desired craftsmanship wise. I realize that it hasn't always been this way (CBS, anyone?), but that's old news. They have moved on.

The bottom line is that neither one is really "better" than the other. They are tools to do a job, and damn good tools at that. And they look good in your living room.

Great post; agree 100%.

This topic comes up rather frequently, but I have a different way of thinking about it. Upon starting a piano search I had preferred the NY sound; a revelation came when I asked myself why Europeans would prefer such a different sound - had I been oblivious to something big? After all, Europe is the birthplace of many pianobuilding traditions and the bulk of classical piano music.

I began to appreciate why that 'European sound' is a standard; I now play two very fine German pianos. I continue to like the American sound too.

People like what is most familiar, but there are benefits to going further afield.

But wouldn't Steinweg have brought that European tradition with him to America, since he was from Germany?

But this leads to a further question:

The U.S. made Steinways feed exclusively the North Americna market, the Hamburg made pianos the whole world.

Is the 'taste' of the whole world then different from the one we have over here?

Norbert

Yes, but due to many factors - including the resources available on a different continent - I think the American Steinway sound (and American piano tone in general) evolved away from its European roots.

Good point -- so glad it did.

I think we should salute the variety available to us. Steinway covers a wide tonal palette between Hamburg and New York. And other manufacturers fill in all the gaps and the extremities. Vive la difference!

+1

I did just listen to Rubinstein play Chopin's Fantasy-Impromptu in C on what I believe is a Hamburg Steinway, and I must say that I much prefer Horowitz's performance on the New York model. However, I'm not sure if this is an issue related more to the pianist or the piano!

OK, I'm back to thinking it's the piano...I just listened to Lang Lang play on a New York model, and I love the sound of the instrument, despite his playing style, which I find overdramatic.

Arnie, you have asked why NY Steinways are different from Hamburg Steinways.

One of our advanced tech heard a lecture at a PTG convention by the past President of Steinway who is now the president of Renner USA, Louis Meyer. For those who do not know Mr Meyer this came from the RennerUSA website:


After Steinway he went to Mason and Hamlin and now Renner.

In his lecture he explained the history in this manner. Before the time of the Second World War, both factories used hammers made in Europe with the famous Wurzen Felt. As WWII approached NY could no longer get German parts or hammers. So they had to switch suppliers. The started using US felt hammers which were a lower grade and softer but they were the best that they could get. They then developed a method of hammer hardening and voicing using lacquer. Thus they went from the European method of starting with hard hammers and softening during voicing to a method of starting with soft hammers and hardening them during voicing.

NY then chose to continue this method even after the war. When the Hamburg factory resumed production they chose to use the harder hammers as before the war. They also chose to make their own methods. Such as they chose to make O model pianos while NY chose to make L model pianos of the same size.

Hamburg Steinways today use Renner hammers with Wurzen felt and full Renner made actions. NY chooses to make their own designed and made actions from designs that they developed more than a 100 years ago. So the actions and touch of the pianos are different as well as the sound.

I am not an expert in these things and I am only passing on this information second hand. So if I am wrong, than please correct me or please add to this history.

By the way at the recent Van Cliburn competition, the contestants could chose from 2 NY Steinway Ds and 1 Hamburg Steinway D All but one of the final 40 pianists chose the Hamburg piano.

I also understand that about 4 years or so ago the Corporation wanted both factories to simplify and make pianos just alike. The Corporation wanted both to make NY like pianos with NY made actions and hammers. Hamburg refused. The NY folks had to cease making the L and start making the O instead. Hamburg factory leaders moved to NY to improve the NY pianos production methods. But NY is so proud of their actions and hammers and Hamburg is so proud of their Renner actions and hammers. So they remain different.

Wow, thank you for that history! That explains a lot.

Interesting that so many chose the Hamburg piano. I truly believe that the New York sound is superior. I cannot speak as to the action, since I have not played a Hamburg, except to say that I did not prefer the other pianos I have tried with a Renner action.

I'd say it's more than "interesting". I'd say it's significant.

It's possible that that particular Hamburg model was best, but I maintain that the New York sound is superior. Just so you don't think I'm a hack, my parents were professional opera singers and I was an accomplished cellist and very good pianist in my teenage years. I also write and produce electronic music. And I hear frequencies in both the bass and treble ranges that most people do not hear.

Forgive my ignorance, but does the Van Cliburn competition attract competitors from around the world? If so, and the majority are used to the Hamburg sound, then it may explain the preference. If it is primarily for American competitors THEN it would speak to the superiority of the Hamburg.

So, can anyone answer this for me?

There is no best, even though you seem to constantly be trying to say this is the case. I believe Lang Lang often plays a Hamburg by the way.

Great point, newguy. They are from around the world, with very few competitors from the USA in the 2009 competition (most were Asian).

+1

Arnie, it seems you are seeking validation that the NY piano is 'better'.

If you think it is better, then it is - for you. Why criticize the Hamburg? Lots of people prefer it.

Since we are talking about something that is entirely subjective, there will never be a single correct answer to this question.

I do suggest you play one (or better yet, many).

Pianoloverus and Whippen Boy,

I'm entitled to my opinion. It's not really much of a question to me that the New York model sounds better. I'm sorry this seems to bother you, but we can agree to disagree. I'm willing to recognize that others may prefer the German/Austrian sound, and that's just fine. I'm not seeking validation -- it's just a strongly held opinion. I don't really understand the criticism for expressing it.

Apparently most of the Americans chose the Hamburg model also.

It's possible that familiarity had something to do with it for the non American competitors, but that also assumes that some of the best young pianists in the world are not very sensitive to tonal/touch differences.

39 out of 40 is not some simple majority.

Also, the American techs who contribute to Larry Fine rankings consistently rate Hamburg better, although this may be more about quality than tonal preference. Rebuilt Hamburg Steinways sold in the US often sell for more than their equivalent NY rebuilds.

Re the Cliburn...

Please can I see the numbers again regarding the choices made by the performers...
Were these choices consistent throughout the competition? or did competitors switch depending on program etc.
What was the choice of the winner?

Where can I get the corroboration of all of these numbers?

In the end, who cares?
Both are great pianos made with care in their respective factories by craftsmen who know how to make a musical instrument.

Regarding the history thing...that's all it is....history....and opinion....the facts are in there somewhere...if the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts....ask Karl Rove!...one great piano player.

What bothers me and probably whippen boy is that "it's not really much of a question" to you. What's the point of so strongly trying to defend something that's so subjective?

If you had said the same thing about Hamburg Steinways in the way you did(Hamburg clearly sounds better), I would also have disagreed.

NY Steinway hammers from pre WWII were extremely soft. The technique of building tone in a soft hammer by adding lacquer or other hardeners dates well before WWII. European pianos used to also have much softer hammers that were more similar to today's NY Steinway hammers then they would be to today's typical German hammers.



The Steinway O was developed in the United States. NY Steinway changed to the L in the early 20s, and Hamburg continued with the O.
Hamburg Steinway hammers are just about the softest out of the box hammer that Renner makes.



Hamburg Steinway makes their own actions using renner parts made to their design. This is a big distinction from say an Estonia action or a Bluethner action, both of which are Renner actions made at the Renner factory in Stuttgart to Estonia and Bluethner's respective designs.
The Hamburg action is more similar to an older NY action in design. The NY action has some more modern features such as the accelerated action, which is of debatable advantage. The actions are fairly similar in design, although the execution of the design is generally much better in the Hamburg pianos. The pianos do sound different although clearly from the same gene pool.

By the way, Steingraeber sources very soft hammers from Renner ( the only other Renner hammer that is as soft as the Hamburg Steinway hammers....maybe even a bit softer)
The Steingraeber hammers are lacquered to build tone as part of their standard process at the factory. Hamburg Steinway also lacquers their hammers at the factory.

I'm sorry it bothered you. You may very well be right, but to ME, the NY model sounds clearly better; hence my surprise at Fine's rankings, at the choices at that festival, and my post. I am honestly really quite surprised.

Of course you are entitled to your (strongly held) opinion, and no, I'm not bothered at all by your preference for the NY sound.

But some of your posts seem critical of Hamburg pianos... which is odd since you have never played one.

And as pianoloverus says, it is all so subjective anyway: we like what we like... at least until we broaden our horizons.

They are essentially the same piano. Why do people keep talking about this?

No specific numbers, but it was a mixed bag as far as choices this year. There were 3 pianos; two belonged to the Cliburn and the third was out of the basement at Steinway Hall. One of the Cliburn pianos is a NY, finished in lacquer. The second is a Hamburg. They said on the webcast how old these were, but I can't remember now. Some performers showed a clear preference for one (mostly the Hamburg and the lacquer NY), while a few switched pianos between rounds.

The two Cliburn pianos were easily the best sounding. The NY had rich warm tone and typical huge bass and the Hamburg had a very unique timbre; warm, yet clear and crisp. Finalist Evgehni Bozhanov played it exclusively throughout the competition. And I must say tonally it was the best piano there, even though the other Cliburn D had bigger bass. The C&A D sounded cold to my ears; it didn't have the warmth one usually associates with the New York instrument, and I think that is why it was played the least, particularly in the semis and finals.

WB, by no means did I mean to be critical of the Hamburg model. It would be my top choice for a piano, if there were no New York model. And you're right that my judgment may be premature, since I have yet to play a Hamburg. I will try to remain open-minded.

Horowitzian, thanks for clarifying re: the competition pianos.

A previous poster in the thread said 39 out of 40 pianists chose the Hamburg.

That poster said 39 of the FINAL 40 chose it.

Ther'es a possible confounding factor here. It's conceivable that during competition the judges had a bias toward the Hamburg sound, choosing 39 of 40 finalists that played the Hamburg model during the earlier round(s) of competition.

Of course, one could then counter by asking why the judges prefer the Hamburg sound...

Anyway, it's clear that some prefer the New York model, while others prefer the Hamburg. To me, the New York model is warmer and more expressive, while the Hamburg sounds brighter and clearer. I prefer the New York sound. And that's why I was surprised by Fine's rankings.

And that's the last post I need to make here. No need to beat a dead horse.

There were only 40 competitors in the Forth Worth Competition to the best of my knowledge. That's what Horowitzian's post referred to.No one was referring to preliminaries that were held around the world where there may have been no choice in pianos or if there were choices they weren't well known.

I visited the dealer the other day and saw new NY pianos with the usual satin lacquer on the outside, but poly on inner side of the fallboard. They looked really nice and will prevent fallboard scratches.

Arnie,

I think the problem is your statement that "the NY model sounds better". It is akin to saying that chocolate ice cream tastes "better" that vanilla.

The truth is that they sound different, and many people with similar experience prefer one over the other.

BTW, Larry's ratings of Steinway (and all ther brands) are no longer based "primarily" on piano technicians. While tech's opinions are certainly considered, his ratings are based on a wide range of piano professionals. The general concensus, worldwide, is that the Hamburg Steinway is of better overall quality than the NY Steinways. Reasonable people may rightfully disagree, but this is the consensus. As Hamburg and NY continued to "align" design and production, consensus is that the gap is narrowing.

Keith,
Thanks for providing some corrective information to the "just so" story of "How the Hammers Got Their Lacquer". Always interesting to hear how these things get spun.

I know some of the finalists and can certainly ask a few why they chose what they chose. I think we would get a variety of answers. This also does not address what their choices might have been if they had had other choices than only S&S.(Remember that the Cliburn is now an S&S only venue).

I can say that the winner, young Haochen Zhang, could have chosen any piano for his public recital in preparation for the Van Cliburn and he did not choose either Steinway.

Here he is just after his recital in Philadelphia:




My 2 cents,

My 10 cents

http://cliburn.org/uploads/images/imagegallery/Zhang_performance2.jpg

Gary is dead wrong; go watch the archives at cliburn.tv and you'll see. Perhaps the fact that the C&A D was a high gloss finish was confusing?

Directly from the Prelims videos:

Mayumi Sakamoto — Cliburn Hamburg D

Yeol Eum Son — NY Steinway C&A D

Kyu Yeon Kim — Cliburn Hamburg D

Yoonjung Han — NY Steinway C&A D

Amy J. Yang — NY Steinway C&A D

Haochen Zhang — Cliburn NY D

Andrea Lam — NY Steinway C&A D

Ang Li — NY Steinway C&A D

Ilya Rashkovskiy — NY Steinway C&A D

Evgeni Bozhanov — Cliburn Hamburg D

Victor Stanislavsky — Cliburn NY D

Mariangela Vocatello — Cliburn Hamburg D

Feng Zhang — Cliburn Hamburg D

Lukas Vondracek — Cliburn NY D

Alessandro Deljavan — Cliburn Hamburg D

Michail Lifits — Cliburn Hamburg D

Ning Zhou — Cliburn Hamburg D

Zhang Zhou — Cliburn NY D

Naomi Kudo — NY Steinway C&A D

Nobuyuki Tsujii — NY Steinway C&A D

Vassilis Varvaresos — Cliburn NY D

Di Wu — Cliburn Hamburg D

Soyeon Lee — Cliburn Hamburg D

Eduard Kunz — Cliburn Hamburg D

Spencer Myer — Cliburn Hamburg D

Chetan Tierra — NY Steinway C&A D

Ran Dank — Cliburn NY D

Stephen Beus — Cliburn Hamburg D

Natacha Kudritskaya — Cliburn NY D

So let's total those up:

Cliburn Hamburg D — 13 pianists

Cliburn NY D — 7 pianists

NY C&A D — 9 pianists

13+7+9= 29, due to one contestant out of an original 30 withdrawing. Where the heck did 40 come from??? Also, 16 pianists chose a NY piano, while 13 chose the Hamburg in the prelims. Hardly a "39 out of 40" proposition. Learn to count, and get back to us.

I thought he was sensational. He moved me tremendously from the very opening chords of his Beethoven Op. 110 to the end of the Prokofiev PC. How was he received at his preCliburn recital?

Is that an Imperial? Did he know he wanted to play a Bosendorfer or did he try other makes also? Is the piano from Cunningham?

Can you tell us a few personal things about him(assuming you met him)?

Can't wait for him to play in NYC. It will be one of the few concerts I'll actually pay for in a long time since there are so many free ones in NYC.

Aren't facts grand? Amazing what can happen when you stay in the "reality based" universe.....

....very much so!

So typically obnoxious, whoever you were talking to. (I didn't count anything, just reporting what another poster said.)

'Nuff said.

Horo...
You're sooo good....

The figures you presented match the impression I got during the event...
Facts is facts :-)

No best or better...all good.

Thank you for your support, Peter!

I'm glad that you had a similar impression. Facts is facts, and posters like PLUS can run but they can't hide from them :-)

Very much...in fact I'm listening to Varvaresos's Liszt Bm right now, on the Cliburn NY D.

Sarcastic and obnoxious as usual.

I'm neither running nor hiding. They weren't my facts and even if they were there's nothing to run from.

I even told the OP I would have said the same thing regarding his comments if NY had been preferred.

Peter, I assume you deal mostly with NY Steinway?

Hey, PLUS, posting the same words all the time is getting pretty boring.

Boring beats obnoxious anytime.

Wish I had a dollar for every time you used the smiley to mean a sarcastic and obnoxious smile instead of a friendly smile.

/ignore

It's ever fascinating how the most obnoxious and unfriendly people always seem to think that somebody else has the problem.

Steven

It's not "fascinating", you're just being sarcastic. I can count on one hand the people I've gotten into arguments with at PW, but you'd need a centipede to count people you've argued with.

Any reasonable person can understand that "Learn how to count and get back to us" was obnoxious.

Q.E.D.

It wasn't sarcasm. It was a statement of truth that pathology fascinates me.

I put my own posting record up against yours any day. People can judge for themselves.

Steven

Utter nonsense.

Thanks, Horowitzian, for taking the time to check the facts. I had the same funny feeling that the "39 out of 40" stat was wide of the mark. I wasn't ambitious enough to go back and check all of the prelim. performances. But I did review a selection of the finals performances for all six finalists and discovered something interesting. There seems to have been a fair amount of jumping from one piano to the next among the finalists. For example, Haochen Zhang (who you show as playing the lacquer NY D in the prelims) played the Hamburg for both his Mozart and Prokofiev concertos. Mariangela Vacatello went in the opposite direction; she abandoned the Hamburg D she used in the prelims to play the lacquer NY D in the finals. And I can't be sure, but it looks to me like Tsujii may have switched from the poly C&A D he started on to the Hamburg for the finals. No wonder people got confused.

Still, your basic point is right: the NY Steinways held their own in Fort Worth, even if one of them went in disguise. Thanks for the leg work.

I think the subject of hammer lacquering needs some clarification.

All hammer felt needs some kind of reinforcement because otherwise the wool would absorb and release moisture making voicing a daily requirement. This reinforcement is often restricted to the low shoulders, leaving the higher shoulders and crown untouched or very lightly touched. The formula for this reinforcement is a highly guarded secret of the hammer makers. Piano makers have been known to complain about the hammer makers consistency with this application but few doubt that it is necessary, as long as the felt at the crown responds to voicing needles applied to the shoulders, implying movement of the felt layers. You cannot get this response if the felt layers are glued together.

Building tone by filling a hammer with lacquer is a quite different technique and one that is, from my experience, almost completely limited to US makers.

OK, hopefully this is my final final point on this matter. When I say "the NY model sounds better", OBVIOUSLY I am saying "the NY model sounds better TO ME". I am NOT saying that other people are not entitled to believe otherwise! The first post on this thread (mine) was made out of sheer surprise that Fine ranked NY Steinway below Hamburg, because to me the NY model sounds better.

And it was nice to learn the facts regarding the competitors choices. Seems like a fair balance betwee NY and Hamburg, which is what I would expect.

OK, now let's all play nice.

Horowitizen (Peter), thanks for doing the work to correct my wrong statement about the Van Cliburn competition. It is great that you are an insider who really knows the competition. I listened to a lot of it but sure was not in a place to come up with statistics. (I quoted a person who relayed insider gossip, which was wrong.)

I too prefer facts and not the great BS which pianist and piano salespersons create. My lame attempt was just that of giving information to Arnie who has an opinion of Hamburg Steinways entirely from CDs.

In truth, I'm not a pianist, my wife is. It is much easier for me to work in the world of analysis rather than the world of artistic comparison. Of course music is something that the non-musician can enjoy and have a good opinions about. Plus the piano is a machine and the analysis of how it works and it how it produces its many sounds invites the mechinical analysis which I am good at.

Again, Peter thanks for your careful correction with facts. I was wrong with the facts but I was writing to intoduce a discussion and get the historicial facts from those who know more than me.

You must be confusing me with Peter Sumner...

It was no problem. In fact, it was a lot of fun because I went back to listen to my favorite performers again.

Cheers!

So you missed Haochen's Nov. 2 free concert in Flushing?

It's a Carnegie Hall "neighborhood" concert. He substituted for Yundi.

If I remember correctly, some contestants switched piano because they ran into "slippery key" situation.

Hey Gary...
Peter here.....
Horowitzian is the other guy...

Thank you so much for your last posting...very refreshing...I am happy that Horowitzian got stuck into those statistics.
I'm sure you noted the kind of comments that came piling in after your first post....it is interesting how that can happen...maybe some folks have an agenda and they like to pick the scab off now and then.
If I can be of any assistance, please let me know.

I think those with the biggest agenda and bias would naturally be some NY Steinway owners, NY Steinway dealers and techs who deal mainly with NY Steinways.

That depends on what the agenda is.

Steven

pianoloverus,

There's lots of mythology that gets tossed around here about Steinway and accepted by folks as gospel truth if it puts S&S in a bad light. Often the purveyors are those who have a vested interest in promoting other brands. In other cases, as perhaps in this one, it just may be the product of accumulated misinformation. Putting a corrective to that with actual data as Horowitzian did seems to be the antidote to bias. I happen to be biased toward factual information.... with an agenda for accuracy.... must work on that.

Sophia

I don't have the slightest problem with H correcting the original data (although his corrections seemed to have been based on the prelims only). I told the OP that I would have said the same reaction to his post if he had claimed that Hamburg Steinways were simply better than NY Steinways.

I do think PW owners of Steinway and other pianos are often far too defensive in protecting their choice of piano and one sided in their evaluations. If one eliminated the comments about brand X from some dealers of brand X and some owners of brand X, I think one would get a truer picture.

Gosh, I think all of the high-end pianos are great. I just wish I had the money (and room) for a Bleuthner, Hamburg S&S, Bosendorfer, etc.

That would make me very happy. I'd invite you all to try them and give me your OPINIONS! I'll bet if played without knowing which was which, each would be preferred by some.

While I have a Steinway, I'm certainly not a snob about it (so far my favorite piano that I've played is a 1936 M&H) There are many great choices, few really bad ones.

The bizarre thing about this thread is that we are comparing Steinways to Steinways. How can there be a 'hidden agenda' behind any of the posts here, when we are talking about the same company?