Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Forum Is the Newer Yamaha U1's Mellower?

Yes you're right Mr Roberts, a Grey Market 20-30 year old Yamaha doesn't sound just as good as a new one.

Philosophy - as with most successful businesses, Yamaha have a philosophy of continual improvement, in terms of production technique, components and design, so a newer Yamaha is better because:

Age - wear and tear affects both the action feel and the tone. (eg, you don't see many 30 year old pianos used in public performance)

Components - better bass strings, better hammers and felt, particularly since 1999, have almost eradicated the reputation that Yamaha had for a hard, sometimes tubby, bass and have contributed to giving their pianos a more European tone.

Design - to further improve tone, structural strength, rigidity and dynamic range:

new scale design,

perimeter type frame (plate)

new rib configurations improve soundboard performance

redesigned backposts.

Functionality -

soft close fallboard

stretched music desk.

The new U1 frame is used in many other Yamaha models, such as B3,(laminated soundboard) P121, (Strunz soundboard) PX124 and Radius RG3(both recently phased out), YUS1, and, I believe, for the N American market, T118 - maybe PB or Steve can confirm that one.

Comparing an old with a newly designed Yamaha, even the new B3 with, albeit, a laminated soundboard, plays and sounds far better than any 30 year old U1 I have played.

PRoberts,

Eventually you are going to have to trust yourself, get your hands dirty, so to speak, and play some pianos. Fishing for opinions, trying to make sense of one set of folkisms, homilies, and quasi-truisms over another will only take you so far before running into a brick wall of piano forum axe-grinders.

They spin their grind-stones, throw off a lot of sparks, but never go anywhere. There's a lot of movement, but little action. When the axe is down to a nub, without ever being sharpened, they trade it in for a new one, their opinions resolutely tied to whatever it is they're selling or buying . . . this week.

Mike

I hear folks say all the time that a Grey Market 20-30 year old Yamaha sounds just as good as a new one. I find that very hard to believe, seeing that technology is always moving forward, even with slight changes.

I have been auditioning upright pianos for a while and I have preferred every new U1 or U3 I have tried versus every pre-1997 model. I'm not technically knowledgeable enough to know the reasons, however the new pianos feel crisp, dynamic and responsive in a way that the older ones don't. There could be a psychological factor involved (shiny showroom syndrome), but I'm pretty sure I could pick the new pianos in a blinded test.

Although words are inexact and I don't know exactly what you mean by dynamic, I have no argument with your description of what has been gained. One thing to remember though is that crisp and responsive should be hallmarks of the newer piano since over time actions, hammers, and strings all tend to lose something. Also, your conclusions are based on playing. In that sense they are irrefutable as opposed to a conclusion that might be reached by someone who read that backposts had been redesigned and concluded that the piano must be better or someone who read that the keybed was made of cheaper materials and concluded that the piano must be worse.

On the psychological effects, it works both ways. One of the things I feel has been lost is depth of tone. It's possible that some of that feeling is based on my response to the sheer mass and over-built nature of some of the older designs which employ more substantial cabinets and/or radial frames. I don't think that's the case but of course it's just as possible as your shiny showroom syndrome.

To be clear, I am hardly trying to put down new U's. As I wrote, I would take the new over the old for the projected musical life even while wondering if that new model would be as pleasurable as the old when it reached the same age. However, if I were to choose one or the other for playing on today and only today, my choice would be less clear-cut. I've played big mid-eighties U's with a depth of tone that strongly appeals to me. Put one of those in the two-way choice and I'd probably take it short-term.

Rather than knocking Yamaha, my posting here was a reaction to the OP's comment that technology's forward march ensured a better product and his post in which he simply copied all of Chris V's points and added only that Chris knows Yamahas. I enjoy Chris V's presence here and his factual approach to things a lot, but I think there's much more to piano evaluation than soaking up the specs that a company presents.

looking for confirmation of your own belief that the current U design in its entirety must be better than any older U design, then collect opinions.

Facts are better than 'opinions'.

Please include examples of new design i.e. changes in scale design. Also improved components related to soundboard,hammers,strings, plate etc

Something must be 'better' somewhere than before?

Here to learn....

sorry not meaning to misquote you...

I thought Chris Venables was a a Yamaha specialist. I guess I was wrong.

Chris is definitely a Yamaha specialist. I have been to his shop and it is the best in the country in my opinion - just due to the helpfulness and knowledge of Chris and his staff. I think it is great that Chris is so active on this forum.

On the psychological effects, it works both ways. One of the things I feel has been lost is depth of tone. It's possible that some of that feeling is based on my response to the sheer mass and over-built nature of some of the older designs which employ more substantial cabinets and/or radial frames. I don't think that's the case but of course it's just as possible as your shiny showroom syndrome.

Tur,sorry not meaning to misquote you...

Specs re any piano, incluing Yamaha's well respected U1 piano are here:

http://www.yamaha.com/yamahavgn/CDA/ContentDetail/ModelSeriesDetail.html?CNTID=1373

Perhaps a Yamaha specialist could better elaborate on the changes from previous years.

Respectfully, they do not seem to be identical to those which had been suggested or listed here on the thread before.

Norbert