Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Forum Exceptional Cost of Exceptional (musical) Kids

Because nobody checks the "In The News" forums...

http://www.pianoworld.com/ubb/ubb/ultimatebb.php?/topic/20/101.html

Here's hoping my kids will just be a bit above average....

Admirably supportive or wildly irresponsible? I tend to lean toward the latter. The mother should be out working at least on a p/t basis, (her argument about not having time to work just makes me laugh!) and I can't quite believe it was necessary to spend $200,000k on instruments, no matter how gifted these young women might be. I think mom and dad have delusions of grandeur.

Good violins and cellos are really expensive. But you have to distinguish the purchase of a $120,000 violin from spending on lessons and music. At this level, cellos and violins are assets just like stocks and bonds. At least in the past they have tended to appreciate in real terms (unlike pianos). So the family financial hardship has to be placed in perspective. The real expenses for them are the ongoing training costs plus any interest cost of borrowing to purchase those instruments. The value of the instruments themselves remains on the positive side of the family balance sheet.

200 grand for student instruments (even at the highest echelon of string students) is pretty insane. That beats the prices on orchestra-level instruments. You're getting close to "museum quality" at that level.

And it begs the question: are these kids better artists because they're learning on "Steinways," or is this just bragging rights for the parents?

Mine is a "very good" bench made cello hand made by the master craftsmen (not a production line) piece, a "beginner" pro level instrument. And for that kind of change, I could buy the cello AND the house to practice in!

(p.s. Anybody want to buy an Eastman 615 4/4 Cello? CW's fingers won't work the bow any more.)


So....


DOES a Steinway train an "exceptional" student to be a better artist? Or is that branding hype?

I think the question is, does a $40000+ piano train an exceptional student to be a better artist than a $20000 piano? I can't imagine anyone singling out Steinway vs say a Bosendorfer for instance, but I bet there are some that feel that any of the tier 1 pianos can help a student be "better" than a tier 3. There is also the issue of how you gauge "better". One interesting statement I've heard from several piano teachers that teach on Steinways is that one advantage their students have is that since a significant number of their recitals/competitions will be performed on Steinways (this can be very regional of course), they don't have to worry as much about their students acclimating come recital/competition time. And if you gauge "better" by performance in competitions, then I guess it can be a factor.

Most of the competitions my son has entered have used Yamahas. :p

More seriously, I find it hard to imagine that a talented student would be handicapped on a good tier 3 instrument like a Yammie C3 or a Kawai RX-3. I bought a "better" instrument for my son, but I did so in part because I was fulfilling my own "mid-life fantasy." He gets the benefit of the better instrument.

I know that a good violin can easily cost 30-40K. How much better is a 100K instrument? Got me, but that's this family's choice. I don't cry over their hardships, and I don't add the price of the instrument to their costs ....only the ongoing interest expense of their borrowing.

I can't help but think these parents are being irresponsible. To take a a $222,000 cash-out and then spend it all before paying the $85,000 in taxes due on it goes beyond the pale of understanding. I also found myself frustrated at the part of the article where the financial advisor is giving excellent advice (e.g., maybe the mom should get a job :rolleyes: ), which the parents promptly shoot down. The most telling part was when the advisor comes out and says that the parents are putting themselves in a situation where they will be financially dependent on their children for their retirement. I couldn't and wouldn't want to do that to my kids.

Whatever happened to living within one's means?

Sports parents do this all the time. How many parents are out there leveraging everything in hopes that junior lands the big 7/8/9 figure contract. It's an interesting gamble, one that rarely pays off of course, but I guess if you fall into the .005% that it does pay off, then it makes it all worth while right Lets just hope that the girls are receiving enough of a well rounded education that if their goals as musicians don't quite work out (or they decide that they want to pursue other interests) that they can do so.

You raise an important issue. Here these parents are literally mortgaging their future to invest in their children's musical education. Just how free will these kids feel to say, 'oh, I've thought it over and I'd rather do something else with my life'? The parents' decision to wager their household financial security on the children's musical careers puts so much pressure on them... Can you imagine how they must have felt on that long drive back from the competition their parents enrolled them in because they needed the $10,000 prize, but they didn't make the cut?

It would be interesting to know what the "pep talk" was before that competition. If it went something like "... we need you to win this so we can get the money ..." then I'd have to say that these "parents" are not just irresponsible, but genuinely bad parents. Your right, to lay that level of pressure on their kids just because _they_ have visions of grandeur is reprehensible.

You're right, and the article even says something to the effect that the children are less aware of the financial problems faced by the family. Though I wonder how possible that is... they're teenagers, after all, and I have a hard enough time keeping secrets from my 8 year old.

Hey, what if those 100K violins appreciate 13% per year in real terms. Sell 'em and recoup the retirement account.

Question is how expensive is the debt they're carrying to support the purchase. Assuming they had to borrow money to pay the taxes due to the purchase, then you would have to subtract the additional interest payments they're making. So that 13% could easily be swallowed up or even still result in a net negative depending on what type of interest they're paying.

Funny, I forwarded this to my wife, made her not feel so bad about our upcoming piano purchase.

Yes, and how inexpensive regular pianos seem after one has read this article!

I once read that Yo-Yo Ma's cello was worth more than $2 million...

What I don't understand is that how could the girls didn't even make to the final 9 in that $10,000 competition if they were "both in the very top echelon of talent for their age." I bet none of the final 9 had spent nearly as much.

I'd advise any parents not to make music their child's career unless he can become Yo-Yo Ma.

Question about Yo-Yo Ma's cello, is it worth $2mil because it's Yo-Yo Ma's cello, or did he go and purchase a $2mil cello?

Excellent point about the kids not even placing in the top 9. What I find even more interesting is the whole issue of the price of the instruments. Something dawned on me this weekend while I was discussing these parents with my wife. Unlike the issue of which piano's we might own, one almost never actually performs on one's private piano. In this regard, the quality of the piano as it relates to any given performance is indirect. The kids who has the used Yamaha upright isn't necessarily at any more of a disadvantage to the kid who has a new Fazioli. However with the string instruments (and most other instruments for that matter), the kid plays the actually instrument. In effect, by purchasing such high dollar instruments, the parents have almost employed a "ringer". These girls were playing their $100000 instruments against others who may have been playing $1000 instruments, and they STILL didn't make the final cut. Maybe I'm just ignorant here and the other kids they competed against also had >$50000 instruments, I don't know.

In this regard I can somewhat empathize with the parents (and many other parents). The problem is, you don't really know until it happens (or it doesn't). Just because the kid is not winning competitions now at age 7, does it mean that they won't win at age 14? Just when do you accept that they won't become the next Yo-Yo Ma? This can be simple if the kid just really shows no or little proclivity, but if they actually do show some chops, how/when do you make that call.

One of my daughters piano teachers students is a senior in high school. Up until about 2 years ago she was a very good player. However, a couple of years ago, something "clicked" and her level of playing popped up another notch to the level that it would not at all be surprising to see her name on the national stage in the years to come. Just shows, it's often not an easy call.

What instruments did Casal and Du Pre use during their teenage training period? And also Yo Yo Ma?