Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Forum Steingraeber A170 vs. Steinway M - appreciate helpful input

I've been piano shopping for a while now, tried a wide range of new and "pre-owned" piano models locally and out of town, and have narrowed my wish list to these two models (new), listed in the Subject in alphabetical order to show no favoritism. For sure, I can't afford and have no room for both!

I've read and re-read all the past threads about larger models of Steingraeber vs. Steinway, and wanted to see if anyone had more specific thoughts about the relative merits of these two ~5'7"-5'8" models. I'll share some of my perspectives eventually, but hoped other PW members' input would help me think about this more systematically.

The room is 13'(feet) by 20' feet; ~9' height.

(Oh, I am sure my prospective dealers will recognize me here, but after mulling it over, I decided to take the risk, put my foot in my mouth, and hope for a tie-breaker and a decision soon.)

Thank you...

What were your impressions of each? When you were playing them, which one did you want to continue playing the most? Did you find one of them easier to play, or more rewarding?

I realize you may have already considered these questions, but the only real answer to your question is: which do you prefer?

They are both, of course, excellent pianos. I think the Steinway has a few less refined attributes: low tenor, tenor/bass transition, and low bass tone. I've only played one smaller Steingraeber (I think the model you are talking about, but not certain) and my impression was that those attributes were more refined on that piano. But that's not a reason to buy a particular piano (at least for most people). They have different tone, and a different touch. The one you like better is the one for you.

The smaller Steinway grands. Models O, L, M, and S are being pressured by several other makers of similar sized grands as regards tone, touch and value. While these Steinways can be wonderful instruments to play, they do suffer from side by side comparison with some other top makes now. The lowest notes are muddy and indistinct in pitch. The breaks are not as smooth. The trebles are not as full, clean and even.

Well set-up the smaller Steinway grands do have much of the warm tone that is the signature Steinway sound in the middle range and portions of the bass. So if you can't live without that sound and you are sure the Steinway you are considering has no problems-the decision is made. It is just that other makers have figured out a lot about making smaller pianos that wasn't known well years ago. And Steinway has not evolved their piano designs at all.

A well set-up Steinway really only begins to outshine all other pianos with their bigger models.

I haven't had much experience with Steingraeber. But I have experienced great smaller grands from Bluthner, Sauter, Bosendorfer, and Fazioli.

I do strongly suggest you hire an independent Technician to evaluate any new fine grand. And as regards Steinway-have them make sure that the capo D'astro bar has not been hardened. Steinway sometimes does this and it wrecks the treble tone and causes more rapid string failure. It is rare but you should eliminate it.

Hope this helps

Having played a number of models from both companies, I can advise with confidence...
.
.
.
you really have to decide for yourself based on your preferences.

Best wishes,

Both good pianos.

The Steingraeber has notes like clear bells throughout the entire scale.

The Steinway has a tenor that roars, a treble that sings, and highs that twinkle.

Both have excellent touch; the Steingraeber has longer sustain, but that seems to be something jazz pianists care about more than classical pianists.

I strongly disagree with this.

First off,Steingraebers were never designed for Jazz pianists as such and have long been recognized as one of the most classic pianos made.

In fact their 5'8 grand is one of them most stunning pianos I have ever played in my entire career.

As opposed to Astoria Steinways, it is a clear tier one piano, quite possibly Germany's very finest!

Choosing between any 2 pianos is of course always a matter of personal taste, but IMHO if placed side-by-side, the difference between these two pianos would be perhaps quite spectacular.

You choose - it's your money!
[and taste..]

Norbert

I'm sorry to say I've never played...or even seen a Steingraeber 170. If you had the chance to describe the experience of playing both to us, that would be fabulous!

+1
I love long (useful) sustain. I don't know why a classical pianist wouldn't.

Of course a long sustain is useful for classical pianists. My experience is usually they don't value it. YMMV.

Thank you all for your responses. Here are my admittedly non-technical, intermediate adult student impressions:

Steingraeber pluses: Incredibly easier to play, I didn't want to stop, very responsive, amazing quality of sound that washes over me directly so I can track what works when I practice, projects tone well across entire range bass to treble, even the very top notes seem to have distinct and full tone (vs. "toy piano" sound on some other pianos I tried). Not "cookie cutter."

Steingraeber concerns: If it's that easy to play and makes me sound so much better (per friends who listened), will it really help me further develop my technique if there's no struggle? Will I develop sufficient technique that will carry over to performing on less responsive pianos? Depth of sound washing over pianist might start to feel overwhelming in a long practice session. A170 shape is wider than most pianos of its size, less curve; where do you put the singer or string player? [This is really a minor quibble.] How will it wear over time? I hadn't heard of it until a few years ago, so I am not aware of how they hold their quality or value? If I ever needed to trade it in, would it command a competitive price vs. Steinway?

Steinway pluses: The Steinways I've liked best are ones I've played at other peoples' homes, recital halls, etc., and seem to be from the 1930s through 1950s. I don't know if their lovely touch and sound is due to age and use, or differences in manufacture. The new Steinway Ms sound lovely from the listener's location, but less full from the player's bench. There seems to be variation in "precision?" for want of a better word, depth, tone or muddiness, across the piano. Bass seems overly loud vs. treble, and less clear, in several I've tried. (My teacher says that is good for me as I will learn to tone down LH and project RH more, but...) Other pluses: my teacher prefers it, and most places where I have recitals or attempt to perform have Steinways, so it may be worth being more comfortable with that action. Universally known, holds resell or trade-in value.

Steinway concerns: Didn't grab me at first. Now that I've tried several for longer periods of time, I feel more comfortable and confident with it.

The difference is almost like love at first sight (sound) vs. a relationship that develops over time. If I could have a Steinway to practice on and a Steingraeber to perform on, that would be the best of all possibilities, but...

Other thoughts in response to the above?

Going from more responsive to less responsive pianos is easier than vice versa.

This is an oversimplification. It depends on a number of factors and the individual player.
Quite often if I'm in a recording studio that has a beautiful grand in the recording space and an old crappy upright in a rehearsal room I'll warm up on the upright and try to get the 'music' flowing. After getting acclimated to the upright, moving up to the better piano makes 'getting into the zone' much easier because of the more pleasing touch and tone. The better instrument creates a smoother transition into an inspired musical space.

That being said, I think that practicing regularly on a high tier instrument gives a pianist a stronger ability to coax the maximum potential from lesser instruments. I would never be concerned about having too good an instrument to practice on. This will only make you a better and more adaptable musician over time. The only downside is that it might be more difficult to find inspiration on lesser instruments after being 'spoiled' on a great instrument.
My two cents from personal experience....

To Ed McMorrow, RPT-
Thank you for mentioning two issues I hadn't thought of. I knew to call in an independent Techician when looking at used pianos, but appreciate the idea of doing so for new pianos as well. Also thank you for mentioning the issue re capo D'astro bar, which I've now researched more online.

Sounds to me like you prefer the Steingraeber.

In my opinion there is no question whatsoever about the durability of a Steingraeber. Resale value is whole different question - and I'm not even sure if that can be known.

I'm not sure I understand your observations about the "downsides" of good touch. Good technique comes from quality practice and working with a good teacher.

Folks who don't like the Steingraeber (I think) usually conclude they like a different sound, and sometimes feel the touch isn't "friendly" to them.

Toss this one out as irrelevant. It's not your teacher's piano. He/she can buy whatever he/she wants. This is coming from a piano teacher, by the way. I do help my students in buying process, but I don't impose my preference.
Are you going to be performing a lot? Once a week? Several times a week? Big concerts? Once a year? If someone is performing twice a week on a Steinway D, then yes I think that's an argument to have a Steinway D at home. But keep it in perspective about what you're actually planning to do. If you're playing twice a year on a Steinway, just visit a friend's house before - it's good practice for performing anyway.
First impressions are important. I think a relationship with any piano develops over time - including those you loved at first sight.

In that case, you can easily go with a larger piano than these. Some of us even have 9' grands in rooms like that. They can be had used at remarkably low prices, because there are so few buyers who have that much room. I've seen some very nice 1930's Baldwins under $25k.

Elaine,

You have a fun choice in front of you. Take your time with it. Because time when choosing a piano is your friend

Reading your original posts reveals much about the piano you prefer. And it seems you prefer one specific instrument for sound (and sounding) reasons.

I tried Steingraeber 170s along the path I took to acquiring the larger Steingraeber I have now. They (170s) are known as extraordinary instruments that play and sound to a level far greater than their size. Which is what your description points to. My own experience with 170s (trying them) is they're absolutely unique beasts. If I could have I would have acquired one with my 205! That's how much I liked them.

But that descibes my experience. Really, if you keep playing both instruments (continue to visiit the dealer) you'll know which one you prefer. And that'll be a perfect choice!

Hope this helps ...

I'm a Steingraeber owner, though I also love a good Steinway.

FWIW, to me the key phrase in your comparative assessment is, "...incredibly easier to play, I didn't want to stop."

Isn't that how you want to feel about the piano you'll play every day?

Friends:

As usual, Ed explains it all in a way that I am totally unable to do. I consider myself a Steinway man and LOVE the various As, the B, C and D as none others.

Geraldine Farrar used to say about voices: when discussing singers, one must always put Rosa Ponselle and Kirsten Flagstad in a category all their own. I feel that way about vintage Chickerings and esp. Masons. But as a universal norm, the larger Steinways define piano tone for me. One is always hearing from friends and others about exceptional Os or Ms or even Ss. I've yet to play one I really liked. It's not the same for the comparable vintage smaller Baldwins. They can be and often are surprisingly good.

The smaller Steingraeber is a remarkable piano and I consider it the best in class. I think it must be said that the perspective of the European pianist is different from ours in the states. They are much more inclined to look toward Bosendorfer, Bechstein and/or Bluthner, all wonderful pianos in their different ways. Although not to my liking, one cannot ignore Fazioli.

The question remains: when will the smaller Steinways be revised ? In the meantime, we must look to our artist-rebuilders to perfect them.

Karl Watson,
Staten Island, NY

You rave about this particular Steingraeber but you have good things to say about Steinway pianos in general and most of those things are about what other people think about Steinways, including your teacher.

You're only going to buy one piano, not an entire brand. You're going to play this piano for many years, not your teacher. You're going to hear it from the keyboard, not from several feet away.

I don't mean this as a criticism but I am absolutely blown away by the power of the Steinway name to mess with the minds of pianists. By the way, my teacher feels the same about Steinway as yours does.