Absolutely!

Forgot about them. They probably squeeze in at first place.

Does anyone know what upset Grotriman?
He has dissappeared with my star and I want it back.

I never dissed any brand, I just ordered them after what I believe is the brand recognition in Europe.

Also, exclusive brands exploit the weakness of people to fall for things that are associated with the brand and not just the brand itself. I am sure I have that weakness myself.

I have no idea myself...would like to hear from him what was it that upset him?

I think G-man missed Grotrian in your ranking.

That said, I just worked my way through this whole, long, long thread, the tirades were tiring. And yes, I'm also excited having found this new word. Good job for seeing it, Chick, and thanks for the typo, Wz.

Now, what I really wanted to say was to repost my experience during the last NAMM show where I played every upright (sorry, no grands) of every name brand presented there. None of them really moved me. Except a Steingräber, for its perfect cabinet. The next one I played (in the same room) was a Sauter 122. And BINGO, this was, to me, the single best upright on the entire NAMM exhibit. Sound and touch, incredible. I wonder why it stood out so clearly. And if (I have no doubt that) the Sauter grands up the upright's ante, then I, also, don't understand why Larry is not ranking it one higher. Sorry, Ax, but the mere fact that the Sauter brand is not top of mind seems to have influenced its 'further ran' ranking.

Cheers,
Arno

Eins,

I was simply noting the brand recognition in Europe, not making a statement about quality. I was also mainly focussing on the 4 big ones, which is why I didn't mention Yamaha and Grotrian. Actually, I think that in Europe, Grotrian Steinweg may be at the same level of name recognition as Förster.

My thoughts exactly..

Pianistical,

I trust that you have no intention to tweak anything or to regroup the piano brands by a certain agenda, but using Europe as a statistical unit is so blurring, it really dilutes most statements.

Europe is made up of these countries:

Albania Andorra Armenia
Austria Azerbaijan Belarus
Belgium Bosnia and Herzegovina Bulgaria
Channel Islands Croatia Czech republic
Denmark Estonia Faroe Islands
Finland France Georgia
Germany Gibraltar Greece
Hungary Iceland Ireland
Italy Latvia Liechtenstein
Lithuania Luxembourg Macedonia
Malta Moldova Monaco
Netherlands Norway Poland
Portugal Romania Russia
San Marino Serbia and Montenegro Slovakia
Slovenia Spain Sweden
Switzerland Ukraine United Kingdom
Vatican City

Each and every one has its own separate history and its own separate culture. Which one do you mean?

OT, there is this site World66 where you can select the countries that you have visited, to create your personal world travel map. Fun! Here is mine:

Eins,

The nature of discussing is generalization.
I do understand that in Southern Germany, Austria and Switzerland Bösendorfer probably is more well known than in some other parts of Europe.

The fact remains that in Europe as a whole there are far more Steinways, Bechsteins or Bluthners than there are Bösendorfers.

I am just trying to correct a misconception in some countries that Bösendorfer is "the piano" of European high culture. I wouldn´t be surprised if Austria is the only country in Europe where the presence of Bösendorfer is larger than the other big makes.

Also, the world of classical music is more tightly knitted than some other European phenomenas, so I think that in this particular case a generalization is appropriate.

And here is mine:
[img]http://www.world66.com/myworld66/visitedCountries/worldmap?visited=USATBECZDKEEFIFRDEGRITLUMCNLNORUESSEUKCNMYTH[/img]

create your own visited country map
or check our Venice travel guide

You get around! Next time you get a chance, do visit Switzerland.
What brought you to the Faroer Islands?

Cool site!

Here's mine: (Spain, don't worry - I'll visit you one day!)

[img]http://www.world66.com/myworld66/visitedCountries/worldmap?visited=CAUSMXCUPABRATBEBAHRCZDKEEFIFRDEHUITLVLILTLUMCNLPLSKCHUKVACNTW[/img]

create your own visited country map
or check our Venice travel guide

As Vatican City is listed as being "European", the burning question is... what is the Pope's[/b] preferred piano?

Pianistical,
Back to my original point. You stated "In Europe, the order of recognition is as follows:
Steinway, Bechstein, Blüthner, Bösendorfer, Förster and Steingraeber."

Where do you get that information? Who did the research, and which countries were represented?
It generalizes so much that it really doesn't stand much ground. Your claim may be correct for the German speaking countries, but I doubt you will find the same ranking in France or England, two of the three major European economies.

That's all I meant to say.

Eins,

Maybe there is some truth in what we are both saying.

Out of lazyness I formulated my list too bluntly. I appologize for that. I have modified my list somewhat in later posts.

I never stated that I have conducted scientific resarch. My list is based on personal experience from real life, literature and the fact that Bösendorfer has made fewer instruments than the other big makes and that Europe was the biggest market for the three B´s during the 20th century.

The main point is that Bechstein comes in behind Steinway in name recognition in Europe as a whole, a position Bösendorfer is believed to have in some countries.

I am not partial to Bechstein. I have still to play a Bechstein that moves me like some other makes do.

I need source data. This post was pure opinion and no data. To state categorically what piano is first second, fourth etc with an heir of authority offends me when there is no hard data to back the statement up.

Please state that this is your opinion. Not a fact.

I'm not offended by the missing Grotrian. Pianistical's statement was an opinion nothing else.

Not to deliberately revive an old thread, but I think Mr. Fine has just given the last word on this issue, in another thread:

Enough said.

And Norbert had it all figured out way back when.

And of course Axtremus had tried so hard to dismiss it . Interestingly, he stayed silent on it after awhile..hmm

Wzkit

Thank you for calling that out.

Obviously I highlighted the word "perhaps" for a reason...

I am still holding out for the odd chance that "perhaps" after more thorough research, Larry Fine might still choose to retain Sauter's current "Group 2" ranking in the next Supplement or the next revision of the Piano Book (whichever comes first).

So I offer you this bet:

1. If Larry Fine promotes Sauter to "Group 1" in the next Supplement or the next revision of the Piano Book (whichever comes first), I send you a Piano World 2-CD set (or any other piano single-CD or 2-CD set of your choice as long as it is still commercially available at that time).

2. If Larry Fine does NOT promote Sauter to "Group 1" in the next Supplement of the next revision of the Piano Book (which ever comes first), you send me a CD of your piano's recording so I can enjoy your fine playing on your Sauter in it's uncompressed form.

3. If the Piano Book business got sold to some one else before Larry Fine gets around to publish the next Supplement or the next revision of the Piano Book -- you win, I will send you the CDs.

Will you accept the bet?

(double post - deleted)

You miss the point. I think it is quite clear from what he said in the last supplement and his most recent comments, that Larry has already de-facto acknowledged Sauter as a Group 1 piano,the use of the word "Perhaps" notwithstanding. Hence there does NOT need to further promote it in the next supplement. In any case, as you would have no doubt noticed, supplements do NOT contain explicit listings of rankings. The only way for us to know the outcome of your bet, is if another revision of the Piano Book is published which does not seem likely at this present point

What are you trying to prove by this bet? And why were you silent all these months in not addressing my points, when you said you would refer to them later? Did you disappear when you realise that there was no other way to respond logically, without making it so obvious that you have an axe to grind (no pun intended)?

The way I see it, this "bet" is but a weak, last ditch attempt to salvage whatever may be left of your ego, after being continuosly refuted on your point. I'm sorry, but if anything, this reveals your stubborness at refusing to acknowledge what are increasingly obvious points.

Somebody here just argued somewhere else that tiers mean nothing to begin with and it's in bad taste to even mention them.....

Perhaps some folks are sometimes wondering when such makes as Sauter with a full 5 points score in 'Confidence' and 'Quality Control' rank behind the untouchable... .. mustering a meagre 3 points in Quality Control themselves.

The reason is the category "known" or "knowledge" about this make, where Sauter receives a lousy 2 points.

[Hey, they're really famous in the Black Forest... ]

So, let's keep the discussion about Sauter alive here.

Once they get a higher point on the current talk show count, they may even end up on top[/b] of tier 1.

Norbert

Norbert, shhhhh! Keep quiet about what's good about Sauter!

I am going to suggest we start talking about what's WRONG!

For example, Sauter's outrageous, very upsetting Peter Maly case designs. And how heavy they are!

Axtremus and Wzkit,

I really hate to see this last bantering. You are two of my favorite posters here.

I highly respect Ax's view on pianos. He is analytical, has a great ear, and has explored pianos continuously. I think this is just because of his nature and love of pianos. He shares his opinions and does an overall great job, being there when the rest of us, who are not in the business, can't be.

And Wzkit, you know that I appreciate your playing and reviews of the Sauter line. I envy your trip to the factory.

The Sauter upright was in high contention for my final choice of uprights and no doubt their grands warranted more exploration. They are top quality in my (amateur) estimation.

You both have read and interpreted Larry Fine's statements about the Sauter.

Knowing Ax's smile when he talks, and his willingness to learn more about all pianos, I saw his offer as a polite and genuine post, said with a smile, not as being defensive or confrontational.

Since it seems like Larry Fine needs to see more himself and hear more from technicians about the Sauters, I also will watch to see how it is listed.

But to tell the truth? To me, it is what WE decide as consumers as to what we like that matters. And tier one or two would never have made me decide 'to' or 'not to' purchase a particular piano.

LL

Roberta,
I think the issue now is no longer whether Sauter is Tier One, Two, Ten, Twenty or Hundred. I think the evidence at this point is quite clear for all except the most hardcore detractors. Sure, I can accept the bet, but my point is that there is enough evidence to show that Mr. Fine had in fact de-facto rerated Sauter at that point when the supplement was written. Or at the very least, Mr. Fine had a strong inclination to do so, an inclination strong enough to mention twice, both in his supplement and his recent post. Whether there will be an explicit rerating as and when another supplement or another edition is published - if that ever occurs) - is besides the point. Especially since the debate was whether there was in fact a de-facto re-rating at that time the supplement was published. So the way I see it, the bet is but a clever, and unncessary distraction.

My issue is with the manner in which this debate occured. I have absolutely no problem with disagreements on something as subjective as tastes in piano tone. You have read my reviews, not just of Sauter, but of many other makes during my search, and to me, I found something to like about in most pianos. In short, I'm ready to recognize that there is a whole range of other valid "musical tastes" out there.
Neither do I have a problem with disagreements about other more abstract issues, such as methodological issues with respect to piano rankings, such as has been discussed here. I think one can always agree to disagree, especially when there is a fair amount of unknown variables out there that cannot be easily verified.
All's well and fine when such disagreements are expressed in manner that shows due respect for the opinions of other parties, even where they differ.
However, I do have a problem when:
1. The poster dismisses the another opinion as "rubbish". That kind of language I would not term polite in any context.

2. When presented with alternative, plausible arguments, the other party, rather than acknowledging the possibility of the arguments, decides to disappear under the pretext that he will address these issues later. That to me, seems evasive. A poster arguing in good, would simply acknowledge the plausibility of the arguments, rather than disappear.

3. When more information becomes available, and the evidence increasingly contradicts that his position, the poster stubbornly digs his heels in, refuses to acknowledge the evidence, and resorts to other evasive measures.

The first issues deals whether the poster has been "polite" or not, and will determine the overall tone of the debate. The latter two issues suggest that the other party does NOT have genuine desire to find out the truth. Rather it suggests to me either
a.A hidden agenda, possibly one with an axe to grind, or
b.Simply arguing for its own sake, just to be a devil's advocate and salvage one's ego.

Simply, it puts into question whether the said poster is arguing in good faith or not. When faced with such an attitude, I will respond accordingly. Likewise, my response and tone will change once convinced that the poster is indeed arguing in good faith.

You are heated on this issue Wzkit....and since I had not read the entire 9 pages again,

....

sorry that I butted in....

Most of us here read the Larry Fine post.

Most of us agree that the Sauters are fine pianos.

LL

Theres a problem in evaluating alot of pianos such as Sauter around here. There are very few pianos bigger than 6 foot at the local dealer and no concert grands except for those brands that we all already know.

Roberta,
I appreciate your attempt to mediate and cool things down here. But likewise, it is necessary for me to state clearly where I am coming from. I'm not "heated", but pushing the point as a matter of principle, since I think the evidence with respect to Fine's thinking is quite clear. I think you will understand, that as a "passionate" musician, I will likewise express my points "forcefully" when it warrants such a response.


LJC,
Your point is precisely what led to Mr Fine's ignorance on the brand, and is similar to the "small sample size" argument that I have advanced. In the event that you do chance upon a Sauter (maybe at Harl's?), do give it a try. It has the kind of tone that one either likes intensely, or dislikes. Seldom the middle ground. You've heard my Delta on recordings, so you can judge for yourself whether that's your kind of sound. My guess is the signature Sauter tone is simply not Axtremus's cup of tea, certainly not compared to his Kawai

to USAPianoTrucker, isn't that a Sauter Vivace?

Nice, but I like the Ambiente more. And it weighs 155kg (540kg vs. 385kg) more than my Omega (guess that made the point about the Maly editions ). Thanks.

That was a joke about the Maly-designed Sauters. In fact, I have one (a Vivace) at home. I wonder whether the Vivace's larger case makes a significant difference in tonal quality. I think it's larger because Maly liked the look. There's no difference in the plate or soundboard.