Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Forum Steinway voicing and regulation cost?

If one has "invested" in a Steinway, and as we all seem to agree the return on investment is not financial but in its high quality performance, then investing a couple of $1000 to bring it to its peak performance is a good idea. Especially when it is played a lot.

...and from someone in the field, precious few pianos are in good nick...

Taming a fine (or often not-so-fine) piano is all about process and relationship. My serious customers, and customers who are wanting more from their piano, speak about their piano in terms that are used to describe relationships, not products.

For these clients, if I were to approach them and their instruments as one would in a turn-key selling exercise...as an exercise in accounting...my good clients would dissappear fast. They want and need something else than one size fits all, products...and they want to talk to you about it and have you share their experience, frustration, and pleasure when the instrument is improved. THey also want and need to know that there is someone there who has the personality and chops to match the machine to the player when things inevitably need fixing.

Clients who have first purchased the piano as if it were a commodity, and then look for a cut-and-dry service product to purchase and be done with it, will have at their finger-tips a machine that functions, for its entire life, at maybe 60% potential.

For some pianists, this 60% realized potential is acceptable. For others, the piano's shortcomings or unrealized potential are a source of continual, and quite stressful musical frustration. A tech's job is matching the instrument and the service to the player. His job is also having the psychological savvy to know when the client,through words or emotions is looking for more or be happy with less.

In my own service, I have clients for whom I provide a $650 one-shot "regulation". Mostly those pianos are quite tired, completely ignored instruments, and the goal is simply to have the piano be somewhat improved and to not scream so bad.
At this price, I don't even try to address the entire instrument, because there is simply too much to do, and not enough time budgeted...and this assumes the rather optimistic scenario that one doesn't run into any parts that actually need repair or replacement, rather than regulation.

For clients where I have already worked on the piano, knows its strong and weak points, and know what parts of the instrument we decided to address a little later, a yearly $600 tune-up keeps things running smoothly and addresses potential problem before they become an issue. For these clients they often ask me "what are we going to work on next"...mainly because the work always has a tangible result.

For clients who are new to me, or who just purchased a new-to-them instrument, for an serious initial tone regulation, assuming tone regulation only and not repairs, 2.5K is an entirely reasonable number given the time and expertise involved. This service is sometimes appropriate to a new instrument which is simply not performing as desired.

Even with these levels of service though, I often feel frustrated that there is still so much I will never be "allowed" to do for the instrument and client, because the economies and realities mostly never totally match.

Jim Ialeggio

Frank Acosta is the man Steinway sends out here in the East Bay. Excellent musician as well as technician 925 212 9131

BDB,
F equals M X A does not include the effects of inertia upon the periodic string we are trying to impart momentum to. Thus a hammer heavy enough to stay in contact with the string beyond one period of vibration begins to act as a damper.

It also does not include the spring rate difference between compressed and rebounding felt. Thus the extra F a heavier hammer brings to the string, is expensed as stretched, worn hammer felt. Volume must thus include noise as well as tone. Pianists regularly pay to have noise removed from tone.

Thus heavier hammers may impart more force -but some of this force produces wear. So it is most definitely not "same force same wear". Also lower inertia actions function very well with friction levels that make a high inertia action unplayable. This friction keeps parts from rattling around and accelerating wear. Over thirty years of my experience has proven that lighter hammers produce more dynamic range in a piano and considerably longer wear.

Key bushings with slop get sloppy faster because the side vectors allow for more sideways acceleration of the key and these forces easily start to exceed the elastic limit of the bushing cloth. Same for cloth action centers.

Once a piano has been finely regulated in situ with the protocols I outlined above-the tone changes little with use. With tuning, dusting out, spot needle voicing, and teflon powder lube on key-pins and knuckles twice a year-the piano always gives a good musical experience whenever the pianist needs it-and will do so for at least a couple of decades of daily use without significant wear. That represents real value

My suggestion is to do what ever you are comfortable with, but in the future, please don't wait 10 years before regulating and voicing a high use piano I do a reg and voice every year on the Steinway pianos at the university. You should set aside a 1/2 day service call on your piano every couple of years, to keep it in better shape.

Well, actually, the M is inertia, so it is included.

Going beyond the questionable physics, even if there is some benefit in longevity, is it enough to warrant spending $2000 versus $800 for the initial regulation, and a commensurate rate for future regulations? If you only save a year's use after 20 or 30 years, that is insignificant. Most decent pianos will last a lifetime, even with little or no service.

BDB,
If you place a two new Steinway grands in practice rooms where pianist's play on them five hours a day for ten years. And one of them is prepared as I described above in my earlier post and the other is "original". The action of the original one will need rebuilding and the prepared one will just need key-bushings, hammer shaping and touch-up regulation.
You do know how to cost compare this don't you?

It is not up to me to prove your advertising claims.

Although a layman I tend to be in the camp of Ed here as I know of a famous concert pianist living here in Brussels - the name shall not be disclosed here - who owned a NY Steinway C that got just average service and that was ruined in merely 10 years of use, be it tough daily practicing.

schwammerl.

That is not the point. Ed is making claims that he cannot substantiate. When called out on the physics, he changes the physics. When asked to prove his claims, he says I should do it.

The question is how much longer than 10 years would your example pianist's piano last before it needs the same amount of work, and would there be any money saved, given that the more expensive service could easily be several times what the ordinary service costs. (This ignores the fact that average service probably barely consists of tuning once a year.) One can easily spend more money on the difference in the cost of service than a new action would cost in 10 years.

You begin with the best Steinway technician around, usually the one who looks after symphony/concert hall pianos. Invite him/her to appraise your instrument. If the work is doable, he'll/she'll ask you what you want, how you want it to sound. He/she gets to work; you leave. When he/she has finished the work, you play the instrument, he/she will make any minor adjustments that you request. You write the check. He/she goes home. You play a splendid example of the Steinway brand. Everyone is happy.

TomazP,

simple and to the point

Jim Ialeggio

Actually, I don't think this is the best way to work things out if a piano is having major voicing.

Unless the tech and pianist have done this before and are sure they understand each other completely, just telling the tech how you want the piano to sound and then leaving strikes me as a dangerous approach. Better for the pianist to stay around and listen to at least a few notes after they have been voiced to see if the tech "understood" what the pianist was after. Communicating about a piano's tone is quite complex.

I'm all for that. Also, what Ed wrote earlier about auditioning a technician is absolutely true.

Even when I'm working with a tech I know well, I usually hang around in the kitchen while they work to hear how it's going. I try not to make them self-conscious, but I really do want to know how it's going.

...and as to whether it's worth the money, I think it is even for the rank amateur.

Not many people can hear when the piano sounds not-so-great. But everyone can tell when the piano is in great shape. Nobody likes having a piano-shaped object in their living room that doesn't sound as impressive as it looks.

Ed,

1- Find a good tech. Get several bids.
2- Spend the money.

You won't be sorry!

My Dear BDB,
Since you claim to understand the physics better than me-why don't YOU take the following question and prove my understanding of the physics wrong.

Title: Describe and Account for the Angular Momentums Created When Piano Hammers of Differing Masses, Under Differing Accelerations, Excite a Taut Piano String and Relative Distribution of These Momentums into Noise and Tone.

Please note you will only need to use Newtonian Mechanics. However if you do discover Relativistic or Quantum effects in the course of your investigation you probably would be nominated for a Nobel Prize.

For myself I prefer to uncover testable theory for Dark Energy/Matter. Or The mechanism for communicating relative mass between bodies across space/time. Or How the mechanism behind con-joined particles functions across space/time.

Oh, lets get back to pianos! I have over thirty years experience adjusting hammer mass according to the musical function of a piano and have ample observation of the difference the hammer mass makes to the wear rate with use of a piano. Plus the old Steinways, Mason & Hamlin, Chickering, Bechstein, Bosendorfer and other makes had hammers lighter than most of what is available today. Just think how many times posters here have complained about how heavy the action became after new hammers were installed. But I suppose you just think I am engaging in "Advertising".

It's too bad that things get into fighting here all the time.

Here's my own take on this, based on my experience:

For Steinway or any other make you don't always need a "Steinway technician" but rather a "very good technician"
They are not that hard to find when looking carefully.

Investing $ 2,500 appears a somewhat inflated price to me. I know of no piano of presumably premium quality needing this type work after only few years.

I've seen the "best of the best" including Steinway technicians in Germany doing phenomenal work in about a day or two. These masters were able to change things substantially - on site. Including refiling hammers,key-by-key regulation, tuning & voicing. A more realistic price for this is about $ 1000-1,500 tops.Onsite reconditioning is very common in Europe

Which gets me to the next point: careful when techs insist on taking actions into their own workshop: one can't alway fully monitor their work and certainly not time spent.

These then are the situations when $ 1,500 jobs become suddenly $ 2,500 or more. Sorry, not to offend.

Unfortunately happening lots in the industry..

Norbert

Your quote describes normal regulation procedures. There are times when this is not enough, and extensive tone regulation procedures are required.

Specifically:

-filing the capo bar when the capo bar needs filing or adjustment because it wasn't none well at the factory...duplex noise right off the showroom floor
-repositioning the hammers because the generic 1 size fits all hammer positioning (especially with S&S)does not fit the as-built irregularities of the plate and case. These irregularities are very common in any piano, but especially in a new S&S piano.
-hammers hung to a common bore which will not allow either proper striking or checking because the plate height varies, sometimes upwards of 1/4" from the generic design.

Without a comprehensive tone regulation, a piano that has these issues will often be played, and the issues never resolved. The tonal consequences are often accepted...sometimes with nary a shrug and other times with some sadness and frustration...it depends on the pianist.

In any case, the above tone regulation is a premium service...but so are these pianos premium instruments. When spending 60-85K for a fine instrument, withholding normal and required "finishing" time to save what is, relatively speaking, a minor expense is an exercise in poor value.

Jim Ialeggio

This may be a difference of opinion on what constitutes regulation and voicing and what are repairs of what might be manufacturing flaws.

If I am regulating and voicing a piano, my job is to get it playing properly and sounding even. It is not to bring it to some sort of ideal which may be different from the reason the owner bought the piano in the first place. So I have to do less work than I might possibly imagine, and bid anything else separately.

I did run across a Steinway L which had some pretty big flaws. The top hammers were hitting more capo bar than string. Moving them back made the black keys hit the fallboard. That required repositioning the hinges slightly. Even so, that was perhaps 15 minutes extra work, not $1000 worth.

In any case, it is my experience that the big money comes from making lots of people happier with their pianos, whether it is a Steinway grand or the old family upright. It comes from doing good, careful work efficiently and at reasonable prices, so that more people will get it done. Admittedly, I am not the best person to talk to about prices for work, but there are a lot of people that I have made a lot happier with their pianos for a lot less than $1000 plus the cost of tuning.

You're correct.

Extensive tone and regulation procedures were exactly what was once required on Chinese pianos of about 5-10 years ago.

If required today, even after years of heavy playing, I would drop the line on the spot.

Norbert