Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Forum Kawai K5 vs K6 vs Diapason 126-S

While in research of a piano for my 7-year-old & 4.5-year-old to start lessons, I came across this forum and would like to get some help here.

I was offered the following options:

10 years old Diapason 126-S for $3450
=====================================








1983 Kawai K5 for $3450
=======================







1979 Kawai K6 for $3800
=======================








All offers include tax, adjustable bench, delivery and tuning, and all are in mahogany high gloss finish.

I couldn't find much info online of the Diapason 126-S, besides that the brand was made by Kawai but is of 2nd class. However, the piano has "High Grade" engraved inside, as well as the "Top Line of Kawai Pinaos" sticker. The pedal area also has some carving patterns(5th picture) which is unusual for a lower end piano.

Also, all three have the "Japan used piano association" stickers attached. An online search revealed that it is a non-profit 3rd party in Japan that does product inspection and quality control to certify used pianos.

All three pianos are in good conditions. The sound of K5 & Diapason are good, and K6 sounds excellent.


I knew nothing about piano a week ago, and have been slowly gaining some knowledge. Any inputs are greatly appreciated!

They are pretty. They aren't K5 and K6 models because those models are from the last decade. They may be the predecessor ~ equivalents. I'm not an expert on Diapason, but I have seen that exact same decorative brass kick plate on a Kawai 49" upright. If memory serves, that piano was from the mid-late 1990's.

As for the rest of the signs and stickers, that doesn't mean much to me. First pick out the one you like best. Then, if you have any questions about it's condition, hire your own tech to complete an independent inspection. At 25-35 years old, you can't take the outward appearance as a true indicator of condition (that's where most of the "refurbishing" takes place) but the prices seem in line with the market. Being mahogany, I'd say that improves the chances that these were originally home pianos.

Have fun shopping!

Thanks for the reply!

So KL-502 is the old equivalence of today's K5? No wonder Google didn't return much info about this model. As you can see, I'm the rookie when it comes to piano knowledge.

I couldn't find the Diapason's production year like I did with the popular brands. The 10-year age estimate is solely from the seller. Your mentioning of Kawai models made in mid-late 90's having the same brass plate confirmed its age, so that's good to know.

I chose mahogany because it's a better match to my living room furniture, and the fact that pianos with this color are more for home usage is an added bonus!

Kawai has made so many models that I cannot confirm offhand that the KL-502 or KL-601 are direct predecessors or not. Experience has shown me that height is a good indicator for Kawai models. At 49" and taller, I've not seen a Kawai that was not at least institutional grade...heavy construction and at least some of their more artistic design elements. At 48" and smaller, there are overlapping models of different specs and purposes...so their is no guideline for those models. It's amazing how much that little inch can say about a Kawai.

How tall are the pianos?

Also, for Diapason, you may be able to date it's manufacture by calling Kawai directly, but that's the best I can do for you.

Oh, I checked some of my old photos...the matching kick plate came from a 2002 Kawai K-50...a direct predecessor of the K5.

KL-502 is 50", KL-601 is 52", and Diapason is also 52".
Diapason is the newest and sounds pretty decent too, but the problem is it's not a well recognized brand which may impact resell value.

Yeah, the plate on that K-50 has the same pattern. Looks like the Diapason's 10-year age is about right. I also sent an online inquire to bluebookofpianos.com asking about the production year.

As a starter piano, I'm leaning towards either KL-501 or Diapason, which both cost $3450. I guess the deciding factor will be whether I prefer name brand or newer condition.

True, but so will having a 35+ year old piano.

bluebookofpianos does not have official industry affiliations, and despite it's name, there is no method of obtaining "blue book" values of pianos like for the auto industry. Perhaps they can help you with the date of manufacture.

Yeah, I see your point. Ok, forget about resell value, I guess what's more important is for the next 10 years, which piano will be more reliable and have less problems...

I would go with the newer piano. However, to be more certain, hire an independent tech to go over them and give you his/her recommendation.

There are new Chinese pianos with 10+ year warranties in that price range...

Stuffs made in China are cheaper at the expense of qualities. I was also offered a Chinese made brand new Nordiska 110 for $3200, and an almost new Nordiska 110 for $2800, but after doing search on the Chinese websites(I'm Chinese myself), I quickly gave up. I think I would rather go with a used Japanese piano than a new Chinese one.

Thanks for your suggestion of going with the newer piano (Diapason), I was leaning towards that after some more thoughts and it's good to get a 2nd opinion to help confirm my mind.

Ok, one more shot:

http://www.pianobuyer.com/fall11/45.html

Nodiska isn't exactly the best representation of Chinese pianos. See if you can find brands listed at the top of the Chinese column in the table linked above.

Tone and touch still very much subjective, though

Crystalwave,

Check out Rick Jones piano website for comparing used Japanese models, some can sound pretty good. For professional level Japanese pianos designed to be played for at least 60 years, 35 years, depending on condition, still guarantees a fairly useful life. Ten years should not be a problem. Many Chinese pianos simply give you little more than a ten year guarantee of mediocrity . . . if you're lucky . . .


Mike

It would be helpful if people would comment on what they actually know something about.

To the OP,

I can't help you much with choosing. It's all about condition, and I don't know enough about the manufacture of Diapason verticals in the 90's to have any idea what standard of quality that piano was built to. Yeah, the younger born date is attractive, but beyond that.....????

I just wanted to comment on Nordiska verticals. I don't know when you were offered these Nordiska prices you mentioned, but whenever it was, the retailer was trying to fleece you. Those models really were entry level. I bought a Nordiska 126 in 2007 for $2900 including 8.25?% tax and delivery. This was a time when the brand was still alive in the market and the pianos were priced accordingly.

At that time Nordiska pianos (especially the grands) had a good market presence and was talked about quite a bit on PW. My piano held up beuatifully in the two years I owned it. I had no complaints. My tech compared it favorably to a grey market U2 of similar size that he had serviced for me previously. He liked the hammers from Helmut Abel in Germany. He liked the pinblock. He felt that the pins were not overly tight as was his usual experience with Korean pianos. That piano had plenty of power and a very very even action response. I lost about 25% on resale, and it took three weeks for someone to come by and appreciate the piano for what it was, but the first person who looked at it took it.

So, like I said, blame the sales pro on the Nordiska 'offers' you received. Even when the company was at its peak, those prices were out of line.

In casing you're wondering.....

the brand disappeared because of a legal situation involving its owner / distributor and Gibson/Baldwin's acquisition of the piano manufacturing plant in China where most Nordiska pianos had been sourced. It did not disappear for any reason connected with quality of product.

I don't in any way share the opinion that a Chinese piano will give you mediocre quality for ten years if you're lucky. IMO people who paint a picture with a floor-sweeping brush should explain their specific concerns in detail and write about specific differences between current Japanese and current Chinese materials and construction methods.

Turandot,

I’m not sure how your statement, “I don't in any way share the opinion that a Chinese piano will give you mediocre quality for ten years if you're lucky,” is any less sweeping than mine. You might as well be saying that you believe all Chinese pianos are extraordinary. I didn’t mention quality and I used the modifier "many” not "most" or "all". No need to twist what I’ve said or feel threatened by it.

Nor do I see how your post offers any stringent proof or backing of your own beliefs and opinions (whatever they are today), other than hearsay and a stale recanting of price, taxes, and your Nordiska's brief but happy history, but certainly not the specific and detailed information (materials and construction methods, Huh???) you now require of others expressing their opinions.

However, I’m sure your Nordiska was a top notch instrument with its abel hammers made in Germany, no less, and the fact that it compared favorably to a 30 year old upright as attested to by your tuner . . .

Mike

Mike,

I wouldn't go so far as to say it was top-notch, but, like most pianos, it had its points and it was nothing to be afraid of -- you know -- afraid of in the sense that some folks here would have you believe there's a 10 year window of opportunity before the thing is rendered useless. I guess that's why when those folks spread the word, they'd rather talk FUD than get down to any piano specifics. They don't know why, but they just know intuitively that an ancient grey-market Samurai warrior will likely still be chugging along after the new Chinese wonder bites the dust.

I thought maybe you could attain a more useful level of criticism. It was worth a shot.

Thanks turandot. Great first-hand info. My own bias/judgement/experience could only come from what I can gather from reading the PW and the PB.

Turandot,

Now you’re disappointed in me for not attaining a more “useful level of criticism?” Didn’t mean to rock your boat as you float through the Chinese tunnel of love, but you’re starting to sound like a slightly patronizing educator.

I know with your incessant posting it is probably difficult to keep things straight, who said what, but I have never said anything about a ten year window of opportunity before a Chinese piano is rendered useless. Nor have I ever called them crap or POS . . . nor said that used professional grade pianos “blow them out of the water” or “run circles around them” or “wipe the floor with them” or any of the other tedious phrases used by PW savants to show their smarts and displeasure . . .

My opinion after playing dozens of chinese offerings over the years is that most are uninteresting and probably remain so through their lifetime unless they improve a lot with age . . .

My opinion of Chinese marketing propaganda is that a fair portion of it falls between commercial deceit and burlesque level hucksterism.

As far as piano specifics what kind of simple-minded FUD is “ancient grey-market Samurai warrior”? Most used artist grade pianos that I like, usually American or Japanese made, are in the 20-30 year range and in good condition. In ten years if taken care of they should still sound pretty good . . .

Mike

Mike,

I'll ignore the usual psychedelic gift wrap and now familiar lament that you've been misunderstood.

I am not personally disappointed in any way.

If it's just a matter of taste, then it's just a matter of taste. I figure that a guy who digs the robust vitality of the Yamaha sound may very well find a good many of the present Chinese pianos lacking. Now, that's only a guess on my part because, as you yourself point out, you never get into specifics. Even with all your flamboyance, it's basically innuendo.

Anyway, I can even see how a guy who felt that some or many Chinese pianos were at their best kind of anemic in tone might just pass them off as mediocre. That would be understandable, even though it would certainly be useful to explore things at a little higher level than personal value judgments.

So, that much I can understand.

But when a guy posts:



There's a little more going on in that statement than taste, even a very pronounced taste.

Would it serve a useful purpose to get beyond this sort of stuff to a level of discussion that promotes understanding?

Clearly yes.

Would you see any benefit in that?

Probably not.

Turandot,

I’m not sure whether you love Chinese pianos or just love to hear yourself talk about them. In either case you’ve carved out quite a niche for yourself on PW, such as it is . . .

And if making things up people haven’t said won't work, there’s always your old standby of accusing them of petty bickering and innuendo while you “simply” want to elevate the argument to a “level of discussion that promotes understanding.” Huh?

Citing specific examples has done little in the past to appease your ego or "promote understanding." It's still like swatting flies at a barbeque. Usually you were stirring the pot with a long stick from a safe distance with your usual high mindedness; however, the end result, whether being attacked by a stiletto or a pipe, was the same . . .

I’ve always enjoyed your mini-tantrums and peevishness, not only because they’re more honest than when you conceal your nature by acting lofty, but also because you have a rare gift for ridicule as well as repressing opinions that don't gel with your own.

What I don’t enjoy are your kaleidoscopic shifts from patronizing to schoolmarming, or, in this case, the overriding narcissism and generalized contempt displayed while wrestling with the word “mediocre”; it’s almost like watching a child play with its stool . . .


Mike