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.