This custom search works much better than the built in one and allows searching older posts.
|
|
69902 Members
40 Forums
143540 Topics
2076831 Posts
Max Online: 15252 @ 03/21/10 11:39 PM
|
|
|
#2003225 - 12/22/12 07:29 PM
Re: low-use SK5 vs. restored 1901 Steinway O
[Re: Robert 45]
|
2000 Post Club Member
Registered: 09/19/09
Posts: 2366
Loc: Atlanta, GA
|
Dear LFL...A whippet is a British breed of dog!! Stranger still, it's the street name for a can of whipped cream, used for the Nitrous Oxide high.  Congrats! Your new-to-you piano will give you a natural high. 
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#2003257 - 12/22/12 09:55 PM
Re: low-use SK5 vs. restored 1901 Steinway O
[Re: LFL]
|
Full Member
Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 410
Loc: Southwest
|
Congratulations on your new Shigeru! I'm sure you'll be ecstatic with it's sound and performance. No matter what you decided, the fact that you researched the options, tried different pianos, and made your choice based on your tastes, playing, and needs, means you made a well-informed decision that you can feel happy and confident about.
Please post pictures when it's delivered. Congratulations again. Fabulous Christmas present to yourself!
_________________________
J & J Yahama C3 PE Casio Privia PX-330 "Inspiration exists, but it has to find you working." Pablo Picasso
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#2003260 - 12/22/12 10:10 PM
Re: low-use SK5 vs. restored 1901 Steinway O
[Re: LFL]
|
500 Post Club Member
Registered: 05/03/03
Posts: 689
Loc: Tennessee
|
Withindale--I found the "better" option, I think. After extensive (and perhaps overly analytical)financial considerations, including looking forward for 20 years, I decided to get a new SK5, instead of the used one and instead of the restored Steinway. Although it is more outlay of $$ initially, it seems like it will cost me the equivalent of (only) $400-500/year extra, over the next 20 years--taking into consideration the cost of the used SK5 plus the additional cost of regulation plus the anticipated reconditioning in 8-10 years (replacement of strings, damper felts, etc). For that, I get the Millenium III action, fancier birds-eye maple on the inner rim, longer keys, ABS-carbon fiber whippets (instead of just ABS on the 2012), reinforced key slip, the MPA visit, 10 year warranty, and a hopefully worry-free instrument for the next 20 years. The 2012 Shigeru has some presumably improved design features. Seems like an acceptable trade-off. greetings, Why would you think you need new strings in this piano? I have many pianos in my care with strings 60-100 years old and the strings are just fine. In fact, a number of Steinways from the '20s and 30's I care for have less false beats than brand new Steinways. Spend your money on regulations and voicings, instead. Regards,
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#2003264 - 12/22/12 10:19 PM
Re: low-use SK5 vs. restored 1901 Steinway O
[Re: pianoloverus]
|
Full Member
Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 410
Loc: Southwest
|
pianoloverus, I think it's misleading phrasing to say that one's piano is only as good as one's tech in the long run. Maybe we should change it to say, "A piano is only as good as the long term maintenance it gets by a qualified tech over its lifetime." We've all heard the sad tales of high end pianos that went for years without tuning, voicing, or regulation.
_________________________
J & J Yahama C3 PE Casio Privia PX-330 "Inspiration exists, but it has to find you working." Pablo Picasso
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#2003331 - 12/23/12 03:28 AM
Re: low-use SK5 vs. restored 1901 Steinway O
[Re: j&j]
|
1000 Post Club Member
Registered: 02/09/11
Posts: 1013
Loc: Suffolk, England
|
j&j Please note I have started this thread to discuss these issues. I think they are out of place here now that the OP (who knows the importance of maintenance) has decided on a new Shigeru SK5.
_________________________
Ian Russell Schiedmayer & Soehne, 1925 Model 14, 55" upright Ibach, 1922 49" upright (project piano)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#2003416 - 12/23/12 08:50 AM
Re: low-use SK5 vs. restored 1901 Steinway O
[Re: j&j]
|
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Registered: 05/29/01
Posts: 17611
Loc: New York City
|
pianoloverus, I think it's misleading phrasing to say that one's piano is only as good as one's tech in the long run. Maybe we should change it to say, "A piano is only as good as the long term maintenance it gets by a qualified tech over its lifetime." We've all heard the sad tales of high end pianos that went for years without tuning, voicing, or regulation. Not really. The condition of the piano is dependent on the care of the tech. But if one starts out with a very poor piano no amount of tech care will make it great. And even after 20 years a sensational piano that's not played eight hours a day and is kept in an appropriate environment may very well sound much better than an inferior piano even if the the sensational piano is simply tuned once a year by a tech with average ability. Of course, it also goes without saying that more frequent care by a great tech will make it sound even better than minimal care by a tech with less skill. Suppose you had these two choices: Choice 1:You are given a well prepped highest quality performance grade piano(the very highest level in the Fine rankings)of your choice for free. You play it 1-2 hours a day and keep it in a room with stable humidity at the correct level. You have it tuned once year by a tech with decent but not super skill. Every ten years you can get one day of voicing and one day of regulation by the same tech. All the tech services are for free also. Choice 2. You are given the same size intermediate level consumer grade piano for free. You play it 1-2 hours per day and keep it in a room with stable humidity. You have the services of a super tech who comes twice per year for tuning and also does lengthy regulation and voicing every 4 years for as much time is necessary. The tech services are for free. I bet a lot of people would choose choice 1 and that their piano would sound and play far better after 20 years than those who chose the second option.
Edited by pianoloverus (12/23/12 09:12 AM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#2003523 - 12/23/12 02:12 PM
Re: low-use SK5 vs. restored 1901 Steinway O
[Re: Ed Foote]
|
Full Member
Registered: 12/06/12
Posts: 51
|
Ed--thanks for your input. All I can say is that the RPT who inspected the used SK5 is VERY reputable and that is what he advised. I think, in retrospect, it was more of a "consider this" but not "you'll have to". And, he was coming from a very professional viewpoint of keeping the piano in "optimal" condition, not just "acceptable".
_________________________
Shigeru Kawai SK5L
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#2008765 - 01/03/13 10:19 PM
Re: low-use SK5 vs. restored 1901 Steinway O
[Re: LFL]
|
Full Member
Registered: 12/06/12
Posts: 51
|
SK-5 (new) delivered today...with assistance of a crane to reach 2nd floor of the house...video to follow. http://www.pianoworld.com/Uploads/files/IMG569.jpg
_________________________
Shigeru Kawai SK5L
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#2008772 - 01/03/13 10:49 PM
Re: low-use SK5 vs. restored 1901 Steinway O
[Re: LFL]
|
1000 Post Club Member
Registered: 02/22/07
Posts: 1394
Loc: Danville, California
|
Unbelievable!
Going to see some tomorrow myself
Congratulations!!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#2009126 - 01/04/13 07:57 PM
Re: low-use SK5 vs. restored 1901 Steinway O
[Re: LFL]
|
Full Member
Registered: 12/06/12
Posts: 51
|
See new thread "SK5 delivered"
_________________________
Shigeru Kawai SK5L
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|