Been awhile since I have posted here. In the past you guys have been extremely helpful with your comeback.

Here is the deal:

I am looking at a 1968 Baldwin Grand and I would like to get your very valued opinions on this instrument.

It was bought new in 1968 by a University. The University is going all Stienway and the music store that has it took many Baldwin pianos in on trade. Most were 6 footers which have been refurbished and sold. This 9' is I think the only one they got. From the looks of the case it has been played alot and probably hard. I do not believe this piano sat on a stage covered most of time and used now and then for a concert. It also has only belonged to this University over these years.

The store I am dealing with is the most reputable store in my city and a large store that does a great deal of business. I currently have a 7' Young Chang I purchased there about a year ago. The Young Chang is an excellent instrument by the way.

They tell me this one will be completely reworked, the case, the action etc. I don't know if they are going to replace the hammers.

They are going to be asking around 20k for the piano.

I would like to hear some opinions of this particular instrument and any feedback since I have told you the history and your opinions on the price.

Your opinions are so very welcome.

Thanks.

I have one here at my place but mine is an SD-6. I think it is a 1950s model so not sure if that model carried over to the 1960s. If theirs is completely rebuilt and refinished that sounds like an okay price to me.

Mine has full Midi send and receive the IQ player system and has also been rebuilt, has the top of the line damp chaser system on it but its 29K too. So at 20 K for that one I guess it just depends on what it sounds like and the overall quality of the job when it's done.

Just my two cents

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJL8iC4iz5M

one of my favorite recording
on this piano

Hunt :

I don't think that anyone can give you an honest or valuable opinion on this particular instrument. When the dealer says it is going to be "completely reworked" that says nothing about how "complete" the work will be. Will it be a rebuild or just a refurbishing? What will be "reworked" and what parts will be used?

No one can say, either, what the quality of the work will be nor what the resulting feel and sound of the piano will be until the work is finished. When that is done, then an independent piano technician can give you an opinion on this particular instrument; until then one can only guess.

Regards,

Before you buy, you need to consider this very carefully (and consider the points in the post immediately preceding mine), and have the piano inspected by an independent technician.

While 9' Baldwins (considering year of manufacture, it should be an SD-10) can be exceptional, I would be very wary of a 45 year old university piano. They take lots of abuse (whatever you're thinking that means, probably multiply it by 5-10 and that's how much abuse they get). Now, I'm speculating, but I'd imagine a piano in this type of environment would need a pretty comprehensive rebuild:

1. New action
2. New pin block, re-capped bridge, new strings
3. Possibly a new soundboard
4. Refinishing

I don't imagine this can be done for $20,000. So, you should ask for, in writing, what they plan to do to it. In all likelihood, you're probably better off sticking with the Young Chang!

I have my personal piano technician, who is also a fabulous pianist himself watching over this rehab for me. I can assure you I will know every tiny little thing that has been done to this instrument. What I'm looking for is the expertise of anyone who knows Baldwins and with the age and history what they think of this particular 1968 instrument. My experience to date on this site has been excellent with all of the older teky's who are on here.

Right, just say that you look forward to trying it when it's ready for sale, as you might be interested if it turns out well.

If you want us to say that a nine-foot Baldwin from the 1960s is potentially a fine piano, I'll say it. As for the price, that sounds ok, if everything checks out ok. No doubt there will be room for dickering.

Hi Hunt,

The Baldwin SD10 is considered to be one of the "great" instruments. In 1968, Baldwin was building at the top of their game. So, without some catastrophic occurance, like fire or flood, the basic piano should be sound.

As others have said, there is no way to evaluate what will be done to it or the skill of the rebuilder. "Reworked" is a rather vague term. Did you play any of the other pianos they worked on? You might already have an opinion about the quality of their work.

If you would share with us your location and the name of the shop, the members may have direct knowledge or experience with the rebuilder.

$20K for a primo SD10 would be a great, great deal!

An ex-University concert grand after that many years is usually an all or nothing proposition. $20k does not really cover all. Those big Baldwins can be among the best bargains around as a platform for rebuilding. They have huge musical potential but stopping short of a complete job leads to disappointing results.

Here's a slightly earlier one we sold last Fall:
1955 Baldwin SD6 - Rebuilt

In this case, the work alone exceeded $20k, but the results were worth it.

I second Sam's advice. Although I think the SD-6's are a better core for rebuilding. I am not a fan of the capo bar string terminater inserts that the SD-10's have. If I were to do an SD-10 I would modify that section to convert to upside down agraffes. This will add to the cost significantly. I have a 1946 SD-6 with new everything that has a fantastic full concert grand sound, it is listed at $55K with all the usual warranty, moving, tuning, and bench.

+1.

Proof will be in the pudding after all is done and finished. Could at least be worth checking out.

Norbert

Friends:

I wonder if I'm alone in preferring the older SD6 to the more recent SD10 ?

Friends "in the biz" assured me that Abbey Simon vastly preferred them, as did Arrau, who went over to Steinway at that point.

I did once hear a beautiful SD10 played by Earl Wild at a Carnegie Hall concert in the early '90s. It had been prepared by their then resident but now deceased Russian tech.

Karl Watson,
Staten Island

The SD6 is also my preference.

As a pianist, I think it is the 'Baldwin Sound' that is so appealing. Seems to me that it comes from either design and it is the tech that keeps it so. Neither should be easily dismissed and it really gets down to minutia. Either one is OK with me.

Marty:

I agree with you but just slightly. The older designs of the 9 & 7 ft. pianos yielded a much darker and more round sound, at to my ears. In fact, I've never heard the newer pianos produce that sound.

The SD10 that I heard in NYC in the early '90s was voiced "up" to produce a big sound for concert purposes but was so gorgeously regulated and finished that one admired it regardless.

One thing that I've noticed is that the older concert grands had a much more focused and clear bass. The bass of the newer jobs always remind me of bass drums.

Thanks for your comment which is well-taken in other contexts.

Karl Watson,
Staten Island, NY

Well Karl, you have your ears and I have mine. My experience is playing them and not listening to them in performance. I find the difference to be the individual instrument and its voicing and not the particular era or model number of the piano.

Ruth Laredo played on a SD-10 in her recording of the Scriabin Sonatas. It is a great recording (and samples can probably be heard on retail sites). I think the sound of that piano was ideal for the music. A perfect match.

Marty:

I don't mean to deny you the last word on this, as I believe you always achieve that without any encouragement, but I am, in a small way, a pianist and am not excluding playing from this discussion, quite the contrary.

Karl Watson,
Staten Island, NY

Exactly right!

The Baldwin 9' from 1910 to somewhere in the 1920,s or 30,s (they do not have the SD-6 on the plate) have a strike point ratio problem in the octave above middle C. The agraffes are swept closer to the strike line and this raises the strike ratio dramatically resulting in a more thin, nasal and woody tone. I don't want to rebuild them.
The SD-6 has the lightest bridge of any piano I have seen. The laminated root of the bridge is alternating spruce and maple. The bridge elevations are quite low also. I like the light bridge but not the low elevations. The SD-10 bridge is taller, (more like a Steinway D) but all laminated maple.

The Russian emigre technician you mentioned must have been Andrei Svelichtny. I spent an afternoon with him and found it most enlightening. It was sad he died so young.

That era was Baldwin model D. I wonder where they thought of that?

Dear Ed McM:

You are quite right, it was Andrei Svelichtny. I met him once and found him to be charming. He was totally submerged in his work and seemed to live through every aspect of the piano's action and tone. He gave the impression of being an absolute genius of piano tech. I've never heard or PLAYED an SD-10 with the sound and sensitivity of the instruments that he prepared.

I'm quite confused when people assert that SD-6 or SD-10 makes not difference and that it is the characteristic, family tone that is their bond. I'm afraid I don't hear it. I've played many SD-6s, and they have ALL had a strong family resemblance. Most of the SD-10s that I've played have reminded me strongly of Asian pianos of the second rank. BUT, I'm aware that they CAN be good with careful regulation, just not especially Baldwin-ish, at least to my poor old ears and feeble fingers.

I admire and appreciate your contributions to this forum, Ed, where ever and when ever I read them.

Karl Watson,
Staten Island, NY

Mr. Watson,

Has the original question penetrated your closed mind? The OP has a lead on an SD-10. Do you feel it does any service to him to slam the instrument and basically tell him to go shop for an SD-6? If you think that an SD-10 is a lesser piano than "Asian pianos of the second rank," you are totally unequipped to make any judgement, whatsoever.

I don't know what your gripe is, but you sure are rude.

Except he hasn't been rude in the slightest. He simply gave his view of the two Baldwins. You disagree with it but another knowledgeable poster basically agreed with him. Your last post, however, is clearly and undeniably rude.

Yes, I intended it to be rude to Mr. Watson as he has been so dismissive of my opinion. Neither he, nor you, know of what I hear in any given instrument. Judge ye not.

Mr. Watson was rude in not considering the OP's reason for this thread and threw out opinions which provided no information for the OP.

This is not a thread about the merits of various Baldwin models. It is a thread about the potential purchase of a specific piano.

It's difficult to understand all this vitriol or to know how to reply to it. The vehemence and intensity expressed are quite beyond my ability to grasp. I suppose one should just slip away quietly and avoid posting one's opinion in future.

My father always maintained that a gentleman was one who did the gracious thing. If it is my responsibility to apologise for having given offense, I do so now, and sincerely.

This is such a wonderful forum, affording a unique opportunity to exchange information and to learn. I would not want to contribute to any confusion or fuzzy thinking.

Karl Watson,
Staten Island

Karl, I enjoyed your comments and hope the "rougher" hands on the computer keyboard who post here do not drive you away.

Hmmm.... So they're going to be asking around $20K when it's done. If they haven't started on it, perhaps ask what they'd want for it in as-is condition right now.

If you can buy it that way and have the work done on your nickel to your taste, that may be a more cost effective way of turning it into the piano you want. You may even have them do the work, but by being the owner rather than a potential customer, you'll get it done your way, and they don't have to front the capital investment in the work. Perhap a win-win.

Having a 9 ft myself (Knabe from 1929), I'd love to be able to say, just go for it, they're wonderful. But, of course, use common sense. If your independent tech OK's the deal and the price is right, then go for it, they're wonderful to have at home. I've never regretted having mine.

Rudeness, perceived or not, does not excuse more rudeness. There is no excuse for anyone on here being rude to anyone else.

He simply disagreed and was not at all dismissive. In fact, he was particularly nice in the way he expressed his disagreement. What "you hear" has nothing to do with what is an appropriate way to express your opinion about what you hear.

Mr. Watson was not rude at all to anyone. The idea that any thread has to remain 100% focused on the exact questions in the opening post is very silly. The huge majority of threads at PW would be considered "rude" used that criteria. In this case, the mentioning of another related Baldwin model was actually very relevant and reasonable.