Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Forum Steinway Appreciation: Final word

Piano*Dad,

I am not having a "go at everybody." It is only those who are taking a total misreading of what I have written who get a response. You fall within that category, also.

PB is not a rebuilder. I don't know what his affiliation is with pastperfectpiano, but, it is obvious that he is not in any way a qualified technician.

On what your opinion about thread is all about, we agree completely. I stated some facts about a specific piano and had rebuttals. I defended myself.

This thread has totally ticked me off and I will continue to respond to any and all moronic replies.

Ken is welcome to end it or delete it at any time.

Why should this thread be deleted or stopped? Why should Marty be banned?

Incidentally, Marty, as you prefer, I won't bother to attempt to give you any further orientation as to the basics of property insurance. But I might suggest that a bit of remedial review of the basic rules of grammar is in order for you. The words within a parenthetical phrase are to be read as a unit, then the meaning of the phrase operates on the word or phrase it qualifies. It is unnecessary to call into question my integrity by suggesting that I am not really from where I claim to be from when you apply that rule to what I wrote. In the United States (over here) the Secretary of the Treasury holds the office that corresponds to that currently occupied by Alastair Darling (over there).

And, thanks, Kenny Chaffin, for directing me to the source of that quote. Disraeli, not Randolph Churchill. Okay, and Mark Twain really gets the credit for popularizing it, if the wiki is right, which I suspect it is.

Let the thread go on. It's fun.

OK - this thread has now totally fallen off the Earth and is in orbit around the now, non-existent, non-planet Pluto.

Seneca - Don't even attempt to talk to me about grammar. I employed only two parenthetical situations, within all of my postings to this thread, and both were grammatically and structurally correct. Do not fault me on my direct quotations of others.

A parenthesis indicates that the contained text is an object of nothing. It is an aside and concurrent thought in reference to a sentence or paragraph.

If you are going to be so rude, may I suggest, that you take a remedial course in punctuation? If you want to have a grammar shoot-out with me, you will need to get some ammo.

You guys hijacked/ruined this thread...

If pulling away from the competition means pulling away in price, it would seem that Steinway was sprinting pretty fast between 1970 and 1990.

Model D Percentage increase by decade

1900 $1,400.... xxxx
1910 $1,600.... 14%
1920 $2,700.... 69%
1930 $3,000.... 11%
1940 $3,150..... 5%
1950 $6,900.... 120%
1960 $7,100..... 3%
1970 $8,275.... 17%
1980 $25,500.. 202%
1990 $53,400.. 109%
2000 $83,090... 56%
2008 $115,990. 40%

Zoopiblob,

The thread isn't ruined. It's just being refurbished.

Does that mean I should chuck my T-bills and invest in the entire Lang-Lang catalog?

Wow! This "Final Word" is really final, isn't it?

That's reminds me of what my oldest son used to call his grandma. "Grammar" and "gamagama." When he was about 2 or so

I'm actually glad you didn't get banned because than I wouldn't be able to read your pathetic rebuttal refutting what I'm about to say. First of all,after taking the time to read this thread in it's entirety,I sense how irate you reacted when persons disputed your commentary on how well you supposedly made out in your so called family restoration scenario. You had evidently expected to recieve overwhelming praise and pats on the back as for how well you did but surprisingly received otherwise. You should have known better that your restoration scenario would be subject to conflicting scrutiny by many.

Maybe if you had specified as for the extent of your restoration instead of having addressed the "guts and the belly" persons may have comprehended and understood your figures. It's called ambiguity in your so called description.
In that you come across as being the authority I would have expected you to be more specific than "guts and belly". But than again I'm considering the source.

As for my comment on Steinway pulling ahead of the other competitive manufactures,my implication was that of if competitive piano manufactures were selling at comparable wholesale and retail pricing of a certain timeline/era than one can assume that the brand noteriety was not yet engrained in public perception. If that manufacture would reign superior whether through marketing means or performance, that would justify that higher price point. If you review John Pels prior post on whether his family should have sprung for the Steinway grand over the Baldwin grand for the few hundred dollars more back in the 50's. Turandot's evidence as for Steinway skyrocketing their retail from the 70's-90's proves one thing ,persons justified the price in those years. Comprende!

My previous statements which I had stated were strictly informational relevant or not relevant,It was not "opinion" but fact The same informational value as your so called tale of restoration.

Having facilitated more restorations and having owned more Steinway grands than you've ever played,I would suggest you stay in your league. Dude!

My affiliation with Past Perfect Piano is that.....I am Past Perfect Piano

"My affiliation with Past Perfect Piano is that.....I am Past Perfect Piano :)" Thus spoke the Broker.

Is that the 'I am who am' of Yahweh or the 'you are what you are' of Belichick? Probing deeper, is Past Perfect the equivalent of the pluperfect or the imperfect?


Broker,

It does seem that what one might sarcastically call the Golden Age of Steinway Price Boosting between 1970 and 1990 is quite different from the so-called Golden Age of American pianos up until 1930. To look at a Golden Era twenty-year window, 1910 - 1930, it seems that Steinway did not flex any pricing muscle to separate from the competition, competition which may have been formidable enough to make outlandish price-boosting suicidal. Is it a fair statement to say that Steinway seized the moment between 1970 and 1990 - the moment when American Aeolian was flushing most of its competitors down the toilet?

A lot of the marketing of Steinway rebuilds is focused on the golden-agers built up until the Depression. I can't imagine lots of rebuild shoppers insisting on a core from 1970 to 1990....more the contrary actually. Would you agree with that?

I've read enough of your posts to understand you're a realist and will go with the flow of giving people what they want. Do you see any future-perfect time when consumers will be focused on cores from another later Golden Age of Steinway (manufacturing, not marketing )?

Marty,

Broker uses the phrase "facilitated the rebuild of..." a lot. He often praises his actual rebuilding team by name. There is no deception. He is candid and forthright.

Keith Kerman and Rich Galassini are not rebuilders by trade either, but they can and do speak very knowledgeably about rebuilds. Piano pros who spend all their time inside a piano's belly are not in a good position to market their business. Maybe that creates good opportunities for consumers such as you who seek our and find top-notch rebuilders who don't need to be paid for a lot of marketing expenses.

Maybe it's time to fold back your horns a bit and think like a musician. (Just a gentle suggestion)

OK DUDE PIANOBROKER,

I did not list "supposed" facts. I listed real FACTS for others to make their own assessment of a particular piano for the concept of "appreciation." That was what this thread was all about.

Your use of "so called" you can shove where the sun don't shine.

I have stated that it was a TOTAL REBUILD. The only original parts that remained are the refinished casework and the reguilded harp. Is that clear enough for you? The TOTAL REBUILD was done by one of the most respected rebuilders in this country.

Of all people, I certainly would not expect that someone in the trade wouldn't understand "guts and belly" in reference to the rebuilding of a piano. I didn't say the piano was refurbished, I said it was totally rebuilt.

I did not expect pats on the back, but, I did not believe that I would be rebutted for supplying simple information as to costs, and appraisals, across the timeline history of a single given piano. When the crap came flying at me, I defended myself. And I include your crap in that also.

Do not even attempt to speculate on how many Steinways I have played or performed upon.

Since the 19th century, Steinway has been recognized as one of the very finest of all piano manufacturers. IT DID NOT BEGIN IN THE NINETEEN SIXTIES.

<Personal attack deleted> You have also confirmed my assumption that you are not a qualified piano technician, but, it doesn't seem to stop you from making grand pronouncements on technical matters. Apparently you are nothing more than a business owner who relies on the skills of others. I am a pianist who relies on my own skills.

deleted

Turandot,

I do agree with you completely and I will state this publicly.

Both of us can get a bit confrontational. Hey, that's just fine. I think we enjoy each other's sense of challenge. I do thank you for your open support in this thread. I think you know where I am coming from, however.

This thread is amusing, frustrating, and often angering. When I am confronted with a charging bull, it isn't in my nature to retract my horns - LOL

Now, I need to get to the piano to continue my preparation for an upcoming performance of the Schumann A-minor. So, I will take your advice, and return to being a musician.

Turandot,Actually you have made a great observation and brought to light a whole different perspective as for what constituted the golden era. This chart is actually quite revealing and informative to say the least. One could probably say that their was no so called golden era back in the golden era and opinions as for the golden era really did not come about till the present,whereas high level restoration became more popular. Persons had a choice as for a restored piano utilizing a vintage core piano as opposed to a newer one. One could probably also assess the "golden era" as for Steinway as when persons took notice as for that acceptant justified price increase. It is somewhat ironic that the era that Steinway took off as for increased price differential was when their quality level plummeted. Being controlled by CBS definitely did not help their quality control. I was talking about this related issue with my rebuilder and bellyman a few days back whereas aside from factory restoration,there was probably no restoration facilities or rebuilding till the 50's or ?.Anyone that wanted to have ANY restorative work done on a Steinway sent it back to the factory. I had a few turn of the century Steinway grand (1889-1890's) that the owners sent their piano back to Steinway in the 40's or 50's to have remanufactured. When I got them at present,they were worn out again but the soundboards were actually replaced at that time.

The only reason one would consider a newer "core" Steinway grand as for a restored piano is the fact that if "newer" there may be price concessions in the rebuild whereas one may salvage the soundboard,bridges,ribs,keyset or ?. If one is addressing everything in a remanufacture,and I mean EVERYTHING ,the only thing left is the case and the plate which I believe is reason enough to desire a golden era "core" piano. "They don't make them like they used to" in my opinion applies to the case and harp.You gotta remember I do this comparative analysis day in and day out of an ex. a remanufactured 1980 Steinway B vrs a 1920 Steinway B.

Thanx for the insight and perspective that I never focused on prior.

The cause of much of the observed price increase from 1970 to 1990 was macroeconomic. You had massive inflation in the late 70's and early 80's, and large increases in labor costs throughout the 80's.

Inflation increases the costs of basically all items, whilst rising labor costs will hit hand made items such as luxury pianos.

I think that if someone is dissatisfied with their newer Steinway, it is very unlikely that they will be interested in rebuilding it from the ground up. It makes much more sense to someone that their 90 year old piano needs a complete rebuilding including new board, block, action and keyset etc. However, we have been commissioned several times to do complete rebuilds on newer Steinways (6 - 20 years old) effectively only saving the rim and plate. I will say that these instruments turned out to be very similar to our golden era rebuilds in terms of performance. I guess someone who is a big fan of the golden era Steinways could say that rather than bring the recent Steinways to the Golden Era quality, we brought our Golden Era Steinways down to the present level, but I don't think that is the case.
Now with that being said, if I have the choice between a complete rebuild of a newer Steinway or an older Steinway, all things being equal, I would prefer the older Steinway, mainly because the cases are more interesting to me and the plate casting is so much better aesthetically. I also enjoy the romance of a Steinway from the 20s rather than the 1990s. But if the rebuild work is comprehensive and done without compromise, my experience is you can get an equally wonderful result with a more recent core Steinway as an older core Steinway. It is just very unusual for most to have the chance to completely rebuild newer Steinways. The ones we have done have virtually all been Bs and Ds out of institutions or concert halls, with a few from private individuals.

There's certainly some truth to that. The question is how much is 'much'. Although the inflationary spike in the early seventies in the US was precipitous, the relative inflation in other countries with other currencies was even worse, and by all measures the upward trend was definitely reversed through the 80's.

http://econ161.berkeley.edu/Econ_Articles/theinflationofthes.html

http://www.frbatlanta.org/filelegacydocs/erq206_nason.pdf

One could also argue that Steinway put a lot of the revenue generated into the care and feeding of its growing stable of artists and growing collection of concert venues. Since no one else was up to the task, it's hard to critiize.

Finally, even if a large part of the price increases was strategic and based on a preceived lowered level of competition, is there anything really wrong with that? Gauging the market correctly and maximizing return are hardly crimes. (at least in capitalist economies.)

However, the fact is that NY Steinway pushed new Steinway prices in that era to a level that allowed independent rebuilders to reap their own financial rewards by offering a much less expensive alternative; and the pianos which Steinway brought to market at those prices were probably not their finest efforts.

If one reads the fascinating Lieberman book about the history of Steinway, one can see some of the things that have determined Steinway prices throughout their history. One of the recurring factors was Steinway's labor costs. There were quite a few strikes or threatened strikes. When Steinway raised worker's wages they often passed along the cost to dealers who sometimes passed it along to buyers.

Turandot,

I am a little confused by this statement.



I can't quite figure out to which era you are referring? Is it the "golden era" or is it meant to refer to the 1960's?

Your price percentage increase chart is very interesting. It also seems to follow the standard financial patterns of the economic trends in the USA. War years, peace years, and growth years. It would also be interesting to see the 20th century tracking for Baldwin, Chickering, Mason & Hamlin, and Knabe. It is only Baldwin which could be tracked as far as your chart. M&H had a hiatus and Chickering and Knabe became, and are now, nothing more than stencils.

In the 1960's, the bigest rival to Steinway was Baldwin with their introduction of the SF and SD series pianos. But, the Steinways remained "King of the Hill." The teflon issue was unknown. At that time it was nothing more than improvement. But, Baldwin sure did come roaring in with those two great instruments.

Nothing else could possibly be more true. If manufacturing costs increase, it will ultimately be passed to the consumer.