Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Forum Isn't Steinway the One to beat?

Nobody else understands it either, especially since their competition goes to great lengths to prepare their pianos so that they arrive in the showroom in superb condition.

I suppose the argument that Steinway might use goes like this:

1) Technically, all Steinways are prepped at the factory to a basic standard, but to do a complete job, such as making sure the action is as frictionless as possible, the pedals don't squeak, the tonal quality is even across the keyboard, etc. is unnecessary work because the piano is going to go through serious adjustment in a new environment anyway.

2) The dealer should take pride in how their pianos are presented on the showroom floor, and under that premise, any Steinway dealer would have a good technician around to do the finishing prep work to bring the instrument to the highest standards.

3) Even with all this, many customers may want a piano they are interested in to be reprepped to give them what they are looking for (a lighter touch, for example).

4) Finally, once the piano arrives in a customer's home, it goes through a further settling period that will last months. Some of the previous prep work may need to be completely redone.

This line of argument would work if Steinway chose their dealers with extreme care and monitored them constantly to make sure the pianos were fully prepped once in the showroom. One or both of these things may not have been happening, given all the stories of inconsistency in quality from one Steinway to another.

As was mentioned earlier in this thread, the company seems to be putting more emphasis on quality and consistency, given the need to step up their quality in order to remain competitive. In particular, NY Steinways, so the story goes, are now being held to the higher standards of Hamburg Steinways, which have no problem competing with the best European pianos.

Sushi45,

You have to compare each instance of a specific example with it's similarily priced alternatives. I
In this case it takes really expensive pianos like Bosendorfer, Steingraeber, Estonia, Grotrian to match and sometimes beat a nyc Steinway All of those will be more consistant but a good Steinway will be great too.

The Boston and Essex can get "stomped" by Estonia and Hailun amd Ritmuller

So it really is a different issue, If you want a steinway cheap? Find an old one thats good and have your tech play with it fwiw imo j

To add, point being, don't be fooled by a steinway association You can get the same quality in half the price new in estonia, OR if you are looking at Boston etc, listen to all the options their are many Old steinways are inspiring also!

Numerian,

You are wrong when you say "Nobody else understands it either..." You go on to explain the situation quite well!

One inaccurate assumption that many people make is that Steinway attracts and employs the best techicians available. While their technicians are very well qualified, the top, "cream of the crop" technicians can make much more independantly or working for rebuilding firms. Most metropolitan markets have several top-notch technicians.

They can "stomp" back, too. For that matter, so can pianos from Sejung and Beijing Hsinghai. The setup and care given to a piano makes a huge difference, certainly. I played an obscenely low priced Chinese piano recently that was incredible. It felt and sounded better than the used Bechstein next to it.

I don't know what to believe anymore.

You can believe that those who write that one piano stomps another....

1.) have a bias firmly in place or are working on a bias under construction that they need for some reason

2.) feel the bias strengthened by putting it to print

It seems to me there are (at least) two flaws in your explanation:

1) the piano may have a defect that makes it impossible for any technician to bring it up to the "Steinway company standard" and that defect was not discovered because the piano was never prepped at the factory to a level that could reveal the problem. In that case, the technician is likely to just say "it's good enough, I can't make it better" rather than ask the factory to fix the problem.

2) the company is passing off its "Quality/Performance Standards" to the judgment of dozens of different non-factory technicians. What one technician might find perfectly acceptable the company might have deemed unacceptable. So I wouldn't be buying a Steinway quality piano, I would be buying Joe the Technician A, Joe the Technician B, Joe the Technician C, etc. quality pianos. The "normal" customers preferences that a technician might "adjust" into the piano could be minor variations in comparison.

This all strikes me as the approach that Detroit use to take in manufacturing cars. They put them together and let the dealers finish them with warranty work. Then the Japanese came along and introduced quality into manufacturing automobiles.

I still can't believe Steinway would do this and ship unprepped pianos to its dealers. I need to hear it from a Steinway dealer.

Rich(facts is facts) Galasinni,



"In 2010, we sold 1,836 grand pianos, of which 1,032 units were shipped from our New York facility to dealers in the Americas. The remaining 804 units were shipped from our German facility primarily to
Europe and Asia." 2010 Steinway annual report.

Just to give a broader picture of the facts.


Mike

Thank you for doing your homework Mike. You are correct. 1032 were made in New York for The Americas. Of those, under 900 were made for North America.

And yes, facts is facts.

Your splitting hairs, though. I gave a more complete picture. Like any good salespro, you gave the narrow picture you wanted to give to knock your competition. It's called cherry-pickin'. I'd still like to see your sources.

Also, your contention that Steinway's numbers are "dwarfed" by the other tier 2(whatever that means)makers, implies that Steinway was the only high-end maker hit by the recession. When the tide went out, it carried a lot of the fancy boats with it.

As long as we're talking numbers are you talking units or sales in dollars as far as dwarfing?

Obviously I, er, trust you Rich, but a little verification, like some separate corroboration would be nice. (not the figures you pull out of yer hat.)


Mike

Geez, 900 vs. 1000. Big deal. How many grands did Yamaha sell in the US?

I also heard production was about 900 during 2010. It’s possible my source was misinformed but it seemed credible at the time. Might there be a difference between the words "produced" and "sold?" The company could have gone into the year with considerable unsold inventory. The year 2009 wasn't all that good for a lot of companies making and selling luxury goods.

ddf

Turandot,

No bias here, I just want the OP to know Steinway is not the most cost effective option in the higher end nor the best sounding in the medium lower priced range I used a stronger wording to couteract a misplaced 'prestige' orientation. Though it might be true that I am biased toward better sounding pianos!

PD,



Rich seemed to imply that New York production was less than 900 in 2010. A more accurate picture would be that they sold 1032 pianos out of New York, according to the annual report submitted to the SEC. I don’t care about what anyone “heard”. Rich knows that, I’m sure he obsessively tracks Steinway’s demise, but his version sounds better. In any case, that’s a heck of a lot less than they had been selling. Along with most of the other premium makers.

132+ new premium pianos is a significant amount, even for America. It’s not only over ten percent of Steinway’s New York production, but it would likely represent more than makers like fazioli, grotrian, fuerich, sauter, etc. sold here collectively in 2010. And I’d be surprised if Bosendorfer’s sum total of US sales was over 150 in 2010, if that. M&H? Bechstein? 2010 was not a good year for any high end maker. If you talk about actual concert grands sold in the US or those built for the Steinway concert bank, the difference might be even more dramatic.

Much of Steinways marketing strength lies in its concert services, Steinway schools, etc. But wait, Rich says Steinway is losing its grip because Julliard got a Fazioli? Huh?

Yamaha has nothing to do with this particular argument. They didn't ship any(or negligible?)tier 2 pianos to the US in 2010 according to Larry Fine. And I suppose Rich is going to use Fine’s tier 2 ratings when he tells us how it took a bunch of tier 2 makers to "dwarf" Steinway’s domestic production. Problem is by any measure except Fine’s, Steinway New York is a top piano, prestige, actual price, concert performance, concert predominance, etc.

The better question is when Steinway finally falls apart who’s going to take their place? I vote for the Cunningham piano or Hailun.

Many Steinway rebuilders are obsessed with badmouthing Steinway, maybe they wish they were Steinway. But they’re not. I don’t know if their obsession is treatable, but it probably isn’t.

Mike

I have a question for Mike Carr: what is your particular point of view? I have only detected anti-other-people in your views, but you can't permanently be as angry as you appear to be for no reason. So why the hostility?

I did not detect in anyone's posts above any inkling that anyone thinks that Steinway is facing the "demise" you cite, nor can I detect any evidence that anyone wants Steinway to meet its maker, as it were. You would be a much more effective advocate if (1) you disclosed why you seek to trash everyone else, instead of leaving us all to speculate, and (2) you could keep yourself from sounding so hostile. You are the one who brought up the idea of Steinway ceasing production, no one else did.

Just my two cents. I expect it would be good for your blood pressure if you could calm down. Speaking of treatable conditions. . . .as you were doing at the end of your post.

In light of Rich's recent statements about Steinway's illegal business activity, and their bribing some judges over a century ago, and how his knowledge of this nonsense, in his own words, has only scratched the surface . . . I don't think I'm too far off in my estimation of Rich's feelings for Steinway. I asked a few questions, clarification about Julliard and some of his numbers, mostly to see if Rich has any real information or just blowing smoke as usual.

Bringing up my blood pressure to bolster your rhetoric while calling me hostile sounds a little ignorant to me.

Writing is thinking. Possibly do a little less of one and more of the other. And let Rich think and answer for himself. He's a big boy now.

Mike

Mike ,,, I think you Got 'em ..... and your smokin 'em ... Peace dude.

Hello Mike,

By now you must know that I do not "just blow smoke". I have no crystal ball and everything I have stated either comes from a reliable industry source or is available in writing - as you've already found.

I think you have totally missed with this statement though:



I assume you mean that I do not like Steinway pianos. But I have no ill will towards Steinway or their dealers in general. I have played some fantastic Steinway pianos in my lifetime and I have stated this many times.

I do have a problem when the promotion of a brand - any brand - becomes so powerful that facts seem to disappear and the only thing that is common knowledge about the brand is what the company themselves "spin". That is not good for any industry, but is particularly harmful to ours.

Unless one uses of course primarily ears & fingers with steady gaze at pocket book...

Norbert

I must admit that I sense a hint of undue nastiness developing in this thread… (Or perhaps has already developed). I would caution certain members to be mindful of what they say/write here because it is not easily taken back or undone. Unless the moderators or Frank removes/deletes a thread/post it remains on the internet forever.

Mike, a few weeks ago you stated in no uncertain terms that you thought Rich had class… why can’t we leave it at that.

I’d love to own a Steinway, if I could afford it.

Rick

"...Unless the moderators or Frank removes/deletes a thread/post it remains on the internet forever..."

Seems I have read that anything that goes up on the web is permanently archived, independently of the will of its posters, and regardless of whether it is eventually removed by the people who put it up.

Even so, 'forever' is probably either an exaggeration, naked hubris, or an excess of optimism.