Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Forum Yamaha C3X or Estonia 190

So I got the opportunity to play on several pianos over the weekend, C2X, C3X and Estonia 190. I definitely prefer C3X over C2X. Estonia dealer gave me a wonderful sales pitch on how superior it is compared to Yamaha. The Estonia 190 sounded very beautifully, and it was far superior than an used C3 in 1980s in the same store. I didn't have a chance to play C3X and Estonia 190 side by side, but I would appreciate any input on these two pianos. The prices are around the same before negotiation. Also, could anyone share the Estonia 190 price with me? I can't seem to find any online.

There are quite a few reasons that the Estonia is rated above Yamaha's C-series in areas of performance, materials and design. However, when it comes to subjective aspects, it's still your decision to make. The C3x is a good evolution to that design that goes back to the 60's. I think there have been ~8 versions of the C3, some subtle and some significant. It remains a benchmark for many competing models, almost a tipping point between the upper end of the "mass produced" pianos and the world of boutique, high-end makers like Estonia and its peers.

It's rare that the 2 models would ever be found on the same floor, but we will have that here soon for anyone in the area that wants to make that direct comparison. We will have a 2017 Yamaha C3x in the same showroom as an Estonia L190. It should be fun. I hope to make a video for others to benefit from comparing 3 competing pianos of similar size.

There are also other models that will give a C3x a run for its money that are less expensive. We've seen really good response from professionals for another brand we represent, specifically competing against new and used C3's.

Regarding pricing, there is general help available on Pianobuyer.com - link somewhere on this page. At the beginning of the pricing guide, it also explains concepts like MSRP, SMP, "street prices" for the US market. There are still variables that affect the local pricing, but I think the prices will be ultimately close enough between the 2 that your preference will win out over a relatively small price difference.

I bought my C3XSH (new) earlier this year, and I think Yamaha really did well with the new CX series. The older C series had a very bright, clear tone, and not much color change from p-mp-f playing. I think it works well with rock or jazz, but for classical, it wasn't very satisfying. But the new CX series have much less bright (aka normal!) p-mp, and mp-f have color that I feel I can use well. When I compared them to Kawai GXs (and Bostons too), the Kawais have a mellower tone, but without that coloring that I find satisfying. I paid 34k USD+tax for mine.

I think Yamaha did well to create a mass produced piano that compares well to a hand made one. And yes, Estonia is doing well bringing hand-made pianos to mass produced price levels.

Maggiezs, I would love to hear your opinions of the pianos, and what you eventually picked. Perhaps even a recording!

Sam, I would love to hear them side-by-side even if it was on video!

Try them, the only way to go!!
Norbert

I'll be interested to hear how the touch differs between the Yamaha and Estonia. I've played a C3X and loved the touch but the only Estonia I've tried was from 2004 and was a bit heavy feeling for me; I've heard the new ones are lighter feeling.

Full disclosure, I'm not an Estonia fan, BUT the 190 is IMO a more musical and refined instrument than anything Yamaha produces in the CX range.

I know the Estonia 190 well - and I have a lot of experience with the Yam CX pianos. Whilst Estonia hasn't quite 'cracked it' yet in order to be on a par with top, European brands, I feel that it is getting there. Their pianos have a lot to offer.

Yamaha - the CX range are tough and reliable instruments. But they are far from 'European' in sound and, frankly, are bland and boring, IMO. You won't get much 'magic' from a Yamaha - but you might (probably will) from an Estonia.

I know others disagree, but I think the Yamaha CX range is NOT a step up from their old C range. The old C7 was (again IMO) MUCH more versatile and potentially sonorous than the boring C7X. To me, it doesn't matter how many technical improvements they claim to have made with the CX series, doesn't matter how much tech people rave at the innovation/improvement, it's about playing them, and living with them. The old C series ones were nice 'musical' instruments.

Buy the Estonia and enjoy making music. Buy the Yamaha and enjoy consistent blandness.

Hi maggiezs,

Welcome to PW. I am quite impressed with both instruments. I carry both instruments and have had very high level musicians compare them and come up with different conclusions. They both perform.

I say - play them both - and buy what YOU love.

Good luck!

Thank you for all your valuable opinions! I read almost all the posts on this forum, and people talk very highly about Estonia here. I really appreciate the craftsmanship and quality of the piano. I think I'll probably need to go back and play some more at the dealers. One thing I'm curious about is that, will Yamaha be able to hold value a lot better than Estonia? I wish I could keep my piano forever, but in the unfortunate event that I'll have to move and sell, I hope I won't suffer a huge loss.

Maggiezs- read online The Uncompromising World of High End Pianos by Sally Phillips in Larry Fine's Piano Buyer Guide. These two pianos are in two different quality classes (see Fine's New Piano Ratings). The Estonia is at a performance level and the Yamaha at a consumer level. A more apt comparison would be between a Yamaha CF and the Estonia. This is not to say the CX is not a good quality piano.
Final factor is which sound and action you prefer, but the quality question isn't really an issue here.

The Yamaha might sell faster as everyone knows it, but truth be told: if you buy a new piano and then go around and sell it, expect to take a huge hit either way.

I think people are far too influenced by Larry Fine. He is not the sole determiner of the class of pianos. As Rich pointed out, many high level musicians try both and come to different conclusions. I don't believe the Estonia is a better class of instrument than the CX series. The Estonia is more dressy and ornate, but as musical instruments, they are on a par. The Estonia is not as refined as the CF series, IMO. Estonia vs CX is a valid comparison, and the choice is personal taste. The Estonia will not do anything in a performance setting that the CX won't. Both are excellent instruments and I'd be happy with either.

Definitely. Once you get past a certain point, where the action is great, and the piano sounds responsive, it's all just a matter of taste. Some people can't stand Fazioli for example. It doesn't matter that it's a "Tier 1" instrument. The same with Bösendorfer. Some people find Bechstein to be utterly unremarkable. Precise doesn't like the sound of the CX series, and I do. Neither of us is wrong.

I agree with John and Ando. After a couple years reading posts here I had negative and positive impressions of a lot of pianos. After hitting the shopping circuit most were turned upside down.

Not only do you need to try them yourself with an open mind, but appreciate that each individual piano may differ in sound, build, prep, and even the environment it is tested, so that you may like one piano but dislike its twin that may have been built a day apart.

Which is not to say the information here was not useful. It was. I learned a lot about what to consider, why, and how to weigh factors.

And note the age, condition, and work quality and quantity done to used pianos may give you an unfair impression of some models and even brands.

And I am probably in the minority but did not like the sound of the particular Estonia I tried. But really liked the Yamaha CX pianos I tried.

Price wise, maybe the CX is comparable to the Estonia. Quality of parts and amount of man-labor required to make the piano, CF is the more accurate comparison to Estonia. I feel that that is a more objective way to look at it.

Subjectively, of course, it is completely plausible that someone would prefer playing the CX to the Estonia, just as someone would prefer a CX to any of the more hand-made instruments. It is not a rare thing either.

There is no evidence that Estonia uses higher quality parts than the Yamaha CX. There is more manual labour in an Estonia, but manual labour isn't always superior to machine work - and in a lot of cases it's vastly inferior. We might also speculate what manual labour costs in Estonia vs Japan - this might be part of the reason for the differential. Of course, a lot of people conflate handworking with increased attention to detail and more precision, but that's not necessarily true. You don't see anyone making handmade silicon chips and they are some of the most precise things ever made.

I feel there is too much mythology around these "tiers" of quality from Larry Fine. I wonder whether it has ultimately done more harm than good for consumers. A lot of people aren't listening with their ears when they go shopping because their minds have been polluted with expectations derived from these rankings. We should all be listening without regard for "tiers" when we play a piano.

I've owned two Yamahas in the past -C7e and the S6. The C7 was from '88-'97 and then the S6 was from "97 to '06. I do prefer the newer CX, and especially the CF pianos to the Yamahas I owned in the past. One tech I use when my regular person is booked up, prefers the older C models to the new CXs. His opinion I respect, I just don't agree with him. Herbie takes him on the road to work on his Faziloi. When he was doing the two piano concerts with Chick , he was working on Chick's CFX as well.

The Estonia I've had two completely different experiences with. I played , I'm fairly certain, a 6'er at Hollywood Piano in Burbank quite a while ago. I didn't care for it at all. The action felt real sluggish and the piano in general was a chore to play. The tone sounded muffled. Contrast that with a 7'er I played in a private home on a gig. It was like a totally different brand or piano - played like butter and had a beautiful singing tone. I realize the lack of prep at the store and also the larger piano easily could have affected my experience with them.

I do find the Yamaha more Jazz friendly, being I mainly reside in that world. The sound is more crisp and immediate. It also blends well with bass, drums and horns. I feel the Estonia is better suited for Classical music,

Yes, play them both and don't worry about tiers.

You may be right about machine work being superior to handwork, or perhaps one day being superior, but it does not change the cost differential. If the CX were using the "best materials" and labor, why would there even be a CF line?

My understanding of the CX line is that it is a mass produced piano and as such its design is influenced by how it can most efficiently be manufactured. One example is the vacuum cast iron plate. I believe the rim of the piano is also not as thick or using materials that are a bit cheaper; the soundboard is a similar situation I think. Small things that may not affect the sound, or may affect the sound in a way that would be "better" to someone.

My view is not based on Larry Fine. It is an attempt at objectivity. The Estonia piano exists because "on paper" it is using the same methods and materials as the most expensively produced pianos on the planet. It is a no compromise design and this has been its selling point and how a no name instrument has gained a place in the market so quickly. Of course, as it is an instrument, a direction was taken as to how it should sound, and in this regard, it is plausible that the sound of the instrument, or the way it feels, would not be agreeable to a musician or less so than another instrument that may be of higher or lower quality.

I understand the question raised about hand made vs. machine made. Having visited a few factories, I an attest that quite a lot of grand construction remains by hand regardless. Yamaha's investment in automation certainly helps the efficiency in making action parts, the V-pro plates, and aspects of finishing case parts.

I do disagree with several of the statements made. Estonia does use higher quality components in many instances. The wood used in the piano is better - in the rims, the soundboard, the keybed, the pinblock, bridges, even the keys. The sand cast plates are individually made then spectacularly finished. They produce hand-wound bass strings that are superior to machine wound. They are using Renner actions and either Renner or Abel hammers that are a cut above the hammers used in the C-series. The result in a performance setting (size appropriate, of course) is greater dynamic range, greater tonal change, and longer & flatter sustain. The bass tone is clearly deeper. The treble is cleaner with more precise and tunable duplex scaling.

I will give added credit to Yamaha that their landed consistency on the C3x and higher models is better than Estonia from a final prep standpoint. When we get in new Estonia pianos, a few need modest prep, most need moderate prep, and a few need extensive prep, but the reward is worth the extra work. I know many of the great dealers in Estonia's network, but I think we take the prep more seriously than some to bring them to their peak.

One of the main factors that makes the Yamaha cost as much as it does is exactly the opposite of what allows the Estonia to be close to it in price. I don't think you'll find the labor rates to be significant between the countries. You will find the normal layers of cost for a global corporation, advertising, distribution, marketing, advertising, warehousing, trade shows. Yamaha also supports a large artist program...more easily done when total US and European sales were greater before the Great Recession. On a per piano basis, I think these costs are significant for anyone choosing a Yamaha. Estonia's business model requires none of those costs.

The only "ad" I've ever seen for an Estonia piano is the one that Pianoworld founder Frank Baxter posts here as a link (it's Frank's hands in the photo) as an appreciation and respect for the manufacturer that he chose after making an extensive tour of European factories.

Those normal layers of business that contribute to Yamaha's success offer value to their customers, their business partners, and their artist partners. However, I think it is very fair to say that more of your money goes into the piano itself in an Estonia.

I don't think you would go wrong with either a new C3X or Estonia 190; it eventually comes down to your preference of tone and touch, and maybe exterior/interior aesthetics.

My own experience: only very briefly, one C3X at our local dealer a couple of years ago, and one Estonia 190 when it was freshly delivered to PianoCraft where I eventually bought my rebuilt Hamburg B.

I used to play a C5 (from the 1990s) daily for several years, and thus I can confidently say that the new CX series (I played a C6X too) have quite different tonal philosophy than the old ones. Yamaha's good touch, out of factory, remains excellent. I liked my C5 a lot, but I think the new CX series in general provide a different, likely wider, tonal palette that is certainly welcomed for some classical repertoire.

I was seriously thinking about getting either Estonia 210 or 225 after I played two well-prepped instruments at PianoCraft. On the other hand, that lone Estonia 190, likely due to its fresh-arrival status, did not appeal to me due to the tone being too bright, totally unlike the other two I played. Maybe this was also due to different hammers equipped?

My recordings aren't remarkable, but many of the pianos have been. There are a variety of these recordings on Estonia's YouTube channel made in our showroom, at the NAMM trade show, and at the world debut of the Estonia model L210 in NYC.

There is a segment from a televised performance by Dr. Laul on the L225 as part of the national independence celebration.

There are several albums from Dr. Laul available from Consonant Works. The solo works are performed on a 9' Estonia. There are also concertos, but some were with an Estonia while others were with a Hamburg D, and I don't recall which. I recall there is an album from Marc-André Hamelin recorded on his L190.

Also linked from the YouTube channel are a few shared videos from other channels including Emily Bear (produced by Quincy Jones) featuring a 9' Estonia, Jazz trios featuring the L210. I love the boogie woogie performance linked there as well.

Estonia YouTube Channel