Posted by: Luke's Dad
Kawai vs. Boston - 03/29/03 08:19 PM
Don't blame me, Chopstix requested this :p
There can be a lot of confusion about the two pianos, IMO they are both great pianos and Kawai has done a superb job in the RX line. There are some differences however that I feel do make a difference:
The most obvious difference is the square tail soundboard on the Boston series. I'm sure many of you have heard some salespeople go on about this ad nauseum, and while it does make for a slightly bigger soundboard; the important part about the design (according to a technician and designer I trust) is that it helps center the bridge a little more evenly.
Another difference is in the action. Not the ABS vs. wood debate, I think Kawai has done a great job proving the benefits of ABS; but in the design itself. The Boston action does use the same geometry as found in Steinways, this does allow for a slightly quicker repitition, and several more degrees of dynamic control.
Another difference IMO deals with the materials. Boston uses a slightly higher grade of spruce than most Kawais I've seen. Slightly closer grain pattern and slightly straighter grain. The felt seems a little more resilient as well. The Bostons in our teaching studios don't need to be voiced as often as the Kawais.
OTOH, a lot of Bostons I've played at some dealers couldn't compare to some of the RX's on my floor. The problem is the same one that alot of people feel is inherent in Steinways. These pianos require a lot of prep. When you uncrate a Kawai, you tune it, let it sit, tune it again, and you have a great sounding piano. When you uncrate a Boston, you need to tune it, let it sit, tune it again, do a little voicing (particularly in the mid through treble usually), and maybe a little regulating. When it's done, a well prepared Boston sounds better and plays better than a well prepared RX. Unfortunately, not all dealers put the work necessary into the Bostons. If they did, this discussion wouldn't be occuring as often as it does.
Now for the rebuttal:
There can be a lot of confusion about the two pianos, IMO they are both great pianos and Kawai has done a superb job in the RX line. There are some differences however that I feel do make a difference:
The most obvious difference is the square tail soundboard on the Boston series. I'm sure many of you have heard some salespeople go on about this ad nauseum, and while it does make for a slightly bigger soundboard; the important part about the design (according to a technician and designer I trust) is that it helps center the bridge a little more evenly.
Another difference is in the action. Not the ABS vs. wood debate, I think Kawai has done a great job proving the benefits of ABS; but in the design itself. The Boston action does use the same geometry as found in Steinways, this does allow for a slightly quicker repitition, and several more degrees of dynamic control.
Another difference IMO deals with the materials. Boston uses a slightly higher grade of spruce than most Kawais I've seen. Slightly closer grain pattern and slightly straighter grain. The felt seems a little more resilient as well. The Bostons in our teaching studios don't need to be voiced as often as the Kawais.
OTOH, a lot of Bostons I've played at some dealers couldn't compare to some of the RX's on my floor. The problem is the same one that alot of people feel is inherent in Steinways. These pianos require a lot of prep. When you uncrate a Kawai, you tune it, let it sit, tune it again, and you have a great sounding piano. When you uncrate a Boston, you need to tune it, let it sit, tune it again, do a little voicing (particularly in the mid through treble usually), and maybe a little regulating. When it's done, a well prepared Boston sounds better and plays better than a well prepared RX. Unfortunately, not all dealers put the work necessary into the Bostons. If they did, this discussion wouldn't be occuring as often as it does.
Now for the rebuttal: