Originally posted by Ron Overs:
Good point Norbert. I haven't experienced many Sauters during my career either. My first experience with them was a new 6' foot instrument at a local Sydney dealer in the late 70's. It was a 'knockout' piano for a 6' instrument, with excellent sustain.

I saw a Sauter concert piano at both the Reno 2001 and the Rochester 2006 national PTG conventions. I haven't read Mr Fine's book, but I can't imagine how an RPT technician/observer such as Mr Fine could place Sauter out of the top group.

Best regards,
Ron O. [/QB]

Originally posted by Cy Shuster:
I agree, Will. Larry also teaches you how to evaluate the condition of a new or used piano. So even though it hasn't been updated recently (except for the supplements), those parts of the book are invaluable.

--Cy-- [/b]

Originally posted by Norbert:

An understanding observation from someone who has obviously, never been in a factory.

Or experienced the benefit of having been there.

Where pianos are also often stored in larger numbers to get ready for - you guessed right - shipping *to the field*.

Or hand selected by those individuals who wish to make a specific selection for themselves travelling there beforehand for - you guessed right again - taking one of the specimen home to *their* field.

...

[Axtremus] You misunderstood.

I ask again: is there a significant difference in the pianos whether they are in the factories or in the field? Are you saying "yes" or "no"?

If you say "no," then evaluating them in the field is just as valid as evaluating them in the factory (as far as "new" pianos are concerned). The only advantage of evaluating in the factory is that you most likely get to evaluate "more samples" in one place, and this advantage is proportionate to the inconsistencies among the population. If the population is dead-on consistent, sample size would cease to be an issue and this "sample size" advantage goes away. (This is not that hard, at least Wzkit took the "consistency" issue head on.)

If you say "yes," then evaluation in the field is more credible because you want to know exactly how the piano would actually perform in the field, not in the factory.

So which is it?[/b]
...

Respectfully, I would have to ask Mr. Fine the same question: "how many"?

[Axtremus] And I wish he would share his answer.[/b]

...

Ever noticed the strange silence coming from Europe itself, the main market for these type of pianos?

One should expect dozens of consumers seeking information for these pianos even from their own home turf - yet there seems to be very little interest in anything anybody here might have to say about these age old European makers.

Least of all is there any indication of 'confusion' or 'arguments'going on.....

[Personal tastes nonwithstanding, of course....]

[Axtremus] Would you be so kind as to explain how the "silence from Europe" is relevant to this discussion at all?[/b]

Originally posted by Norbert:
...Does anybody really believe that a consumer who would seriously like to learn about a product costing tens of thousands of dollars, would not today use the internet - or any books - to find as much information about it as possible...[/b]

Originally posted by Wzkit:
That such a comment could come from a *third party* - another piano builder and a potential competitor no less-, who obviously has *no vested interests* in promoting Sauter says enough about the level of quality of the brand.

Originally posted by Norbert:
Ax:

The very fact that you don't see any relevance in my mentioning of the 'silence from Europe' in discussing German [or any other..] pianos here, shows how insular our perspective and discussion in North America often is.

Rest assured, I certainly don't blame you for it - it's often exactly the other way around!

But then, does anybody really believe that a consumer who would seriously like to learn about a product costing him tens of thousands of dollars, would not today use the internet - or any available books - to find as much information about this product as possible - should he really find himself in the dark and see a 'need' for it?

Perhaps the needs *are* different in different parts of the world....

Chances are, we're coming closer to what's actually going on - the world is greater than we think....

If anything, that Euro-based place we here call "The Dark Side" seems to exhibit more basic ignorance of pianos than I see here. Maybe you interepret that to mean all the educated ones are off playing leaving the class dunces to post and question...I might let that point pass.

wzkit wrote:

In the ideal world, evaluating pianos *in the field* would be the best solution. However, as already articulated, the reality is often far from ideal, due to limited production/distribution, so looking for pianos *at the source* might be perhaps the best solution.

Originally posted by Norbert:
...Perhaps visiting your average Piano store here and play on those pianos on the floor - and then try this in some of the bigger European cities, especially Germany - you'll see what I mean.

Now, if I go to Fischer Piano in Stuttgart web page or some of the other mega stores over there, I wonder what I could possibly learn if I'd ask about 'Mason Hamlins'.... [/b]

Originally posted by cmk:
Axtremus
Have you played on any Sauter, upright or grand?

Originally posted by Axtremus:
wzkit, aren't you the least bit concerned that perhaps Ron's comment on Sauter's "group placement" might not be credible due to the "small sample size" issue here? [/b]

Originally posted by Norbert:
Ax:

I am sometimes a bit surprised how you tend to sometimes dig in your heels in - especially when somewhat different perspectives are offered here sometimes.

So let me be a bit blunt:

Personally, I don't give a rat's *** if Larry Fine places Sauter in tier 1, 2 or 5.

[Axtremus] Good for you. I don't give a rodden's hind quarters on Larry Fine's actual tier placement of Sauter either. What I am interested in here is the "not enough info" excuse being used to discredit that placement.[/b]

For all it's worth, nobody else within Sauter's worldwide market *does* .

[Axtremus]Dude! Speak for yourself. Some one who is obviously part of Sauter's worldwide market obviously cared enough to start a topic on this subject (and, no, there's nothing wrong with caring about this).

Besides, aren't you the one who first offered the "not enough information" excuse for Sauter's "Group 2" Piano Book rating on this forum? [/b]

In Europe as well as the rest of the world, Sauter - as virtually every other traditional German manufacturer of pianos - is known as a first class maker of instruments.

Plain and simple.

Any competitior I have ever spoken to, would have no difficulty acknowledging this basic fact - as we would have none about the German brands they have chosen for themselves.

Please remember, that with the exception of very few, most have their
[very small..] production of pianos pre-sold months ahead of time.

Now, we all know that models do differ and there can be all kinds of variation between them.

But to come along and place these makes next in very general 'performance' categories is not just way out of line - it is *unmakable* - even if one very much would like to do so.

I have played many pianos of my [German] competition that have left me in awe and I have played some of the Sauter uprights I did not choose to bring to my showroom.

Talking about 'performance' by any one maker without due reference to their line up of many different models[/b] , makes no sense at all - none![/b]

I don't think you have to be from Europe or America to get the point.

Perhaps "that is why" we're not getting much feed back or inquiries from over there.

People there have had 200 years to check things out......

And that - at least to me - *is* relevance.

In that the whole thing doesn't make sense!

Got it now?

So that's it? "The rest of the world" (with the Germans having 200 years to check things out)

Originally posted by Wzkit:
Not at all. I have merely singled out Ron's comments as an *example*, coming an extremely credible source. While he might be just one person (a builder and competitor no less), it is very likely (again we cannot say with certainty) that if a credible *uninterested* source like him has made such a comment, so would a number of other third party sources - interested or otherwise.

It seems to me that you have once again conveniently ignored the important evidence I have pointed out (about a credible source making a favourable comment) and tried to distract it by referring another argument (about sample size).

You must. You've spent the better part of this thread trying to theorize why Larry Fine could possibly place Sauter in any other category than tier one. In your more recent replies in this thread, it seems almost as though you're trying to discredit Mr. Fine.

Ulrich Sauter was asked what he though of Larry's tier two ranking of Sauter and he basically said that he was sorry he feels that way, but respected his opinion. And he left it that. So why can't you?

My Sauter certainly rated above anything I played in Tier II. I'd bet it still does. I did trade my Estonia for it. I don't know if a Baldwin SF has been booted from the Tier I list but my Delta was certainly better than the ones I played. Personally, I dislike the comparably sized *NY* Steinways, but but this is JMHO. I've played many new S & S's & I couldn't (I still can't) justify dropping the coin on one, then having my tech re-prep, primp & hone the thing so it could have the opportunity to shine. In comparison, my Delta was perfect.

Originally posted by Axtremus:
I quite agree with you that certain set of circumstances can make "factory evaluation" the "best solution." The argument lies in whether this applies to Larry Fine's rating of Sauter at all.

(p.s. Oh, and it looks to me that Ron Overs has never visited the Sauter factory too... might that affect your confidence in Ron's evaluation of Sauter? ) [/b]