Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Forum Steinway & Sons - are they doing any product development?

I heard the (Hamburg) C played in concert once, in a small hall. In that venue, it sounded almost indistinguishable from a D, with plenty of power and bass. It did help that the pianist was Benjamin Grosvenor (who played Ravel, Chopin and Liszt, and pulled no punches).

I own a 1906 NY S&S-C. It is the 7'-5" version and was totally rebuilt/restored in 2004. The new Steinway hammers were shaped and sanded to match the specs from the era. They are lighter than the contemporary hammers used on the D's and it became a very fast action. The key length and geometry are exactly the same as its big brother. Tonally it is like the D without the sheer, blazing power. The bass is spectacular and unless you were competing with an orchestra in a 2,000 seat auditorium, you would not notice the difference. Production ceased in the U.S. in 1936. Hamburg has always manufactured the C.

A few months ago in NY, I accidentally attended a tech seminar given by one of Steinway's chief techicians, if not chief technician. He spoke about several significant changes being implemented. Perhaps a tech in the know can explain the changes in detail.

Also, the plate on the "B" has been modified over recent years.
Don't know one way or another about any other models.

So yes, S&S is involved in product development.

fingers

Several years ago I had an interesting situation. A Steinway D from 1957 that had a cracked capo, at the extreme top end of the piano, it was cracked at each end of the upper section and completely unstable in tuning. Without much hope, I called Steinway in New York and asked; 'Have you got a plate for a 57'-D behind the coffee-maker somewhere?'. To my immense surprise...they told me that the plate had not changed in the intervening 50+ years, and they would be happy to install the new plate and restring the piano.

This told me that research and development were not high on their list. They have a product, they like selling it; salesmanship and the 'cachet' of the Steinway line are what moves their product. Not 'innovation' and research and development.

Just an opinion!
Methinks,

Except that since 1957, Steinway has gone through adding Teflon to their actions, and then changing the way that they do that. They have changed their keys, most noticeably the tops perhaps as many times. They have changed the geometry of their actions, and the composition of their hammers. There are probably many other changes that we know about, but just have decided that they do not count.

Then there are other changes that may have happened that are not part of Steinway's research. For instance, I think the current Mapes piano wire is far superior to what we were getting when I started working on pianos years ago, and Steinway, as far as I know, uses that.

Dear BDB,

You are absolutely correct. I was a little over-the-top there...

But...unchanged in decades? Dating to far before our current understanding of inharmonicity, scaling, and soundboard properties? Is the 'D' really so perfect in fundamental design?

Please understand that I am quite happy with the last several years of Steinway production! I tune and care for several very fine D and B pianos in performance venues and homes. But, I look at Yamaha, Kawai, Steingraber, Mason-Hamlin, Fazioli, and others for innovation...not Steinway. Young Chang is where Del brought that wealth of change and innovation into small grands...not at Steinway. I have, unfortunately, not been able to put an ear onto the new Young Chang models he refers to! Dangit. I feel Del best expresses how the piano manufacturing world works...as he has been part of it for most of his career. I always appreciate his input in these discussions (thanks, Del!).

Steinway? Their latest 'new' was a retro-looking Model 'O', trying to tap the 'good 'ol' days' market. Is Steinway good? Absolutely. Are they a source of innovation and forward thinking in the last 25 years? Show me!

Smiling,
and being,
cantankerous,
to see what people say,
I am,

Actually, the new model O has a different case than the old one. The lid prop fits in differently.

A place I work at just got a new D, which has some sort of special treatment around the edge of the lid to prevent damage as it is moved around. It also has the new big casters for moving around. I have not had a chance to check it out carefully, as construction is still going on, but those are some innovations I know about.

I can't really pin this down precisely- I'm a pianist, not a piano technician — but I've always felt awkward playing the Model C's, which seemed to me to be rather stiff and unexpressive. This may have to do with the fact that it has a much larger pianos mechanics, while it is barely longer than the Model B. But I really don't know, but I have noticed that many pianists and technicians also rather dislike the Model C.

In this 3/4th grand range, at a similar length than the Steinway C, I think the Boesendorfer 225 really is a very nice instrument, certainly the best of the non-Imperial Boesendorfers.

This is probably a question of balance; Boesendorfers — compared to Steinway — generally lack power, that's why the extra length of the 225 Model versus the 2 meter model (lacking in the bass) is really appreciative. On the other hand, the Model C just seems unbalanced to me, awkwardly stuck in between the B and the D which are both perfect.

Considering the much lower price, the lowly Yamaha C7 is also very nice instrument, I think you can get a lot out of it with the right prepping/voicing (I'm not saying it's better than the C, but it is 3 times cheaper). This is just to say that the 2m20-30 range is not intrinsically bad, but that Steinway hasn't found the right combination for that instrument.

I generally think that every manufacturer has a piano length where he really shines...

I actually had a 1899-1900 Steinway A fore many years - until the soundboard cracked all over during a particularly cold and dry winter - and absolutely adored it.

But despite the subjectivity of our likes and dislikes, we can say that the F183 is indeed a much better piano than the Model A - it's technically more advanced, has more power, more projection, more dynamics. I don't think many people are in love with the Model A, or that Steinway is loved because of that model. People buy Model A's because they can't afford or don't have the space for a Model B— and I don't think the savings of 23 cm or 10 000$ are worthwhile when you can afford the already very expensive A.

I concede that you may prefer the "Steinway sound" to the "Fazioli sound" (which is my case) , and thus prefer the lesser piano with the sound you like to the better piano with the sound you like less...

I have a 1905 Ibach 235 at the moment. It happens to be contemporary with Marty's Model C.


The gentleman who restored the Ibach a few years ago described it as a "late Romantic instrument". That seems to accord with Marty's lighter hammers from that era.

Seeing the comments about the C having a D action I checked the Ibach. Its keys are about 21" long like a B and the longest string is 69" (agraffe to bridge) half way between the B at 59" and D at 79".

While the reasons for D keys and action in a shorter instrument are clear, who knows if a C with a B action and longer strings might have been more popular?

I think you will always have a big problem(especially at PW!) when you state that one of two pianos of a very high class is superior to the other as if it were a fact rather than an opinion.

For example, even if one agrees with your statement that the Fazioli has more power and more projection, I think these are of no importance in the home setting where these pianos would usually appear. Also, technically more advanced isn't always superior.

I think the issue with the C is how to get the soundboard to be as responsive as the B and D usually are.
I have one that I rebuilt about 15 years ago that if I remember correctly was too heavily ribbed. The C board was ribbed more like a D, I moved the rib dimensions closer to a B and the result was spectacular.

As regards Seinway Innovation; their greatest competition is old Steinways, until they give Steinway players a credible reason to replace their existing Steinway with a new improved design, that problem will remain.

You are welcome.

And if you are attending WestPac in Phoenix this year you can try out at least the smaller pianos. I don't know exactly which models will be on display but YC will be showing some of them. As well, I'll be presenting a class describing and explaining at least the major design and construction changes being made.

ddf

But is that due to marketing success, or a truly superior product?

Let's compare with Rolex - no doubt a very successful company and regarded by the majority of people in the industrialized world as maker of the worlds finest watches. Much like Steinway.

There's no doubt that Rolex make fine watches, but perhaps not the best in the world. That title belongs to other watchmakers, if the title is not for best marketer or salesmanship. Then Rolex wins.

I mean, take a look at the videos in this thread
https://www.pianoworld.com/forum/ubb...20vs%20Kawai%20-%20how%20grand%20pi.html
Do you believe that Steinway is truly superior to all other brands, in all areas? I don't!

No piano is "truly superior" to all others. We often forget that Steinway built its international reputation when the "New World" was unaware of the European counterparts. Today, all of the great instruments are available to play and test at our whim.

Steinway, with a 150 year tradition, still manufactures superb instruments. Is it better than all others? No, but it remains, and justifiably so, ranked with the finest pianos of all time.

Recently?

A quick search of patent applications (applied for but not yet granted) shows these assigned to "Steinway Musical Instruments" You can go to the USPTO and read the full applications

1 20120240743 HAMMER STOPPERS FOR PIANOS HAVING ACOUSTIC AND SILENT MODES
2 20100269665 Hammer Stoppers And Use Thereof In Pianos Playable In Acoustic And Silent Modes
3 20090282962 Piano With Key Movement Detection System
4 20090277318 Wrestplanks
5 20090211425 PIANOS PLAYABLE IN ACOUSTIC AND SILENT MODES
6 20090165628 Upright piano
7 20080190261 PIANO

The period covered here is from 2008-present. (It can take 3 or more years for a patent to grant. A 5 year old application of mine just granted...)

+1

Norbert

Europeans were stunned by how strong, durable, musical and beautiful the early American pianos by first Chickering and then Steinway were. They set the standard for future evolution of the european makes.