Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Forum Blüthners - Idiosyncratic instruments?

I agree with the forum member Alex Hernandez that Blüthners are very idiosyncratic instruments.

Some of the most beautiful sounding instruments I have heard have been Blüthners. Some times they can have a dull sound, which by many is confused with the Blüthner warmth(An observation made by Jens Schlosser, another forum member) and lack of power(My observation).

The Best Blüthners are not voiced mellow and thus have a big, full, clear, warm, beautiful and singing tone.

Terms like chocolatey have been used on this forum to describe the sound of Blüthner pianos and this indicates to me that they belong to the group of Blüthners that are either voiced too mellow, haven´t been played in(Blüthner uses soft abel hammers)or are simply not so good specimen.

I am pretty sure that the piano that Arthur Rubinstein encountered in a recording studio belong to the group of Blüthners that have that big, clear and singing tone:

“After my coffee and cigar we went to one of the recording rooms where they had a Blüthner piano. It was not a concert grand, and when I objected to playing it, Gaisberg said, 'Try it and we will see.'

Well, this Blüthner had the most beautiful singing tone I had ever found. I became quite enthusiastic and decided to play my beloved Barcarolle of Chopin. The piano inspired me. I don't think I ever played better in my life.”

Artur Rubinstein

Oh, by the way, HAPPY CHINESE NEW YEAR!

Let's not forget that every true musician in the world is also "idiosyncratic"

If this piano is "happening" and truly speaks to you,what else would anyone *need* and what else would be at all relevant to know??

norbert

Norbert,
The words you quoted above are not Pianistical's.
These words were said by Arthur Rubinstein...one of (if not the) greatest pianists of the twentieth century about the Bluthner.
The direct quote comes from his biography "my many years", page 281.
Pianistical only quoted Rubinstein, although it seems that he too shares Rubinstein's view in regards to the Bluthner.

Just to share my experience with the Bluthner 190. This was located in the same dealer as the Shigeru SK-5, which I found an amazing instrument - but too large for home unfortunately.

Moving on to the Bluthner, given the rave reviews this make has been getting on Pianoworld, I was expecting a deep, warm and rich instrument (similar to what I had experienced with Sauter, Steingraeber and Bosendorfer), but to my great surprise, this particular Bluthner had a rather thin and piercing treble to my ears, and a mid range and bass that was lacking in depth. The action too, fared poorly next to the Shigeru, probably due to poor regulation. I was unable to produce a convincing pianissimo on this instrument as there was simply no sound when the keys were depressed at low velocity. And to top that off, the Bluthner was priced 70% more than the Shigeru SK-5!

I must admit that was extremely surprised and am quite reluctant to believe that this instrument is representative of the make, or if this was simply a poorly voiced/regulated specimen. If anything, it seemed the complete opposite of what had been described by many many others. Unfortunately, in our small market here, there are no other Bluthner dealers from which I can sample another instrument. So to cut the long story short, I'm still willing to give Bluthner the benefit of the doubt - perhaps they are indiosyncratic instruments!

Ori:

Thank you!

Perhaps a giant like Arthur Rubinstein makes the point even more convincing.....

Norbert

Never thought that I would hear this greeting on this forum, but...Happy Chinese New Year to you too!

Do you happen to be Chinese too?

I can only speak from my personal experience with this maker.
I have worked on virtually every model from almost every era from pre WWI,WWII to DDR and current models. I also own a 2001 model 2 and have friends with various models.

The only ones I have heard that are dull, underpowered or to bright or those pianos that have not been properly maintained.

They aren't your ordinary garden variety German piano and they require a knowledge of not only the piano but THEIR individual sound.

LONG LIVE BLüTHNER!

Alex:



Norbert

Thanks Norbert, BTW the Peter Maly Sauter at NAMM was absolutely spectacular. I still can't get it out of my mind. Have you ever had this model?

Wzkit and others,

I am half Chinese and half Swedish, or the other way around if you like.

Alex, which Peter Maly model were you referring to? I was pretty impressed with the uprights (the Rondo and the Cura in particular), but have not had a chance to try the Vivace

Which half is Swedish?

It was the Vivace Peter Maly. I liked more then I had expected.
It was among my favorites at the show.

I find that putting duct tape across the name board sometimes improves the sound.

I'm very very curious about the Vivace, given that 1) I didn't have a chance to try it at the Sauter factory, and 2) it is supposed to be based on the Delta, which I bought. Could you please describe to me what you liked about it? (perhaps in a new thread if possible, to avoid hijacking this thread)

Thanks...

Modern day bluthners sounds thin, wimpy and glassy.
The cast iron frame looks as if it's designed with cost-cutting and material saving in mind...pardon me...I may not know the industrial processes well enough, but I've not seen any grands with a cast iron frame that looks so wimpy.

If the Blüthner sound is wimpy then I suggest you stop listening to death metal and ebay your Metallica record collection.

As far as the plate looking wimpy I think many people would call it elegant. Google Bluthner and you will see pictures of plates over 100 years old on instruments still in service.

Blüthner is elegant and lyrical while maintaining strength and projection of tone.

Now that I have offended you and defended Blüthner I bid you good day!

P.S. Just having fun!

Alex:

I own the 'Vivace' - a half brother of the Maly...

Norbert

Norbert,
How does the Vivace sound different from the Delta?