I love playing on steinways and I have a chance to record some music on a fazioli grand. Just a question in general, is one better than the other or are they both very good?

Thanks

Steinway is Steinway.

Unfortunately for them, Fazioli is Fazioli. 🙂

I suspect that Fazioli will be prominent in the next Tchaikovsky Competition, which starts next week. Shigeru Kawai and the newer Yamaha were very impressive at the competition, last time.

The Naples (Florida) piano series has been putting out a bunch of vids with an impressive Fazioli (and the quality of the pianists helps, of course). 😆

I never particularly cared for the ubiquitous Steinway sound, which is why I've never made any recordings on any Steinway.

Most are on Fazioli; with the others on Bösendorfer, Grotrian-Steinweg, C.Bechstein and Yamaha.

Incidentally, of all these brands, Fazioli's action is the easiest to control to my liking; and also, its grading (increasing heaviness of key action towards the bass) is the least of any brand that I've played on (which is almost every one past, present and future). Or the best controlled, in other words, which I believe is one of its designer's parameters.

Did I also mention Fazioli's much 'purer' sound (i.e. far more fundamentals and less extraneous overtones) compared to Steinway, which is particularly noticeable - and desirable - in the bass.

From my experiences with Fazioli, I never encountered bad Faziolis, but I have had numerous encounters with bad Steinways (even brand new ones).

Nobody asks me to make recordings. 😆

I often think that the classic American Steinway sound is ideal for concerto recordings. The Hamburg sound is less interesting to me. But not all American Steinways have that sound, and some pianists get it from the Hamburgs.

Agree: the sound of New York Steinway D's and B's has been more robust and the actions more controllable, than the Hamburg D's and B's I have played. (No need to pay twice as much!!).

One doesn't wait to be asked . Wasn't one of the most talked-about (post-Gould) Goldberg recording a self-financed recording.......which made its hitherto unknown pianist quite famous?

(Though I did make my first recording at the invitation of a piano showroom for their website to promote their new grand, from which I sent copies to various people, after which requests came in.......)


A revelation to me was hearing Rach 3 on a Fazioli (from a competition - the Rubinstein, I think) which revealed hidden counterpoint and clarity in the busy and dense piano textures that I never heard from Steinways (except when the pianist chose to bang them out......).

They are different. Also New York and Hamburg Steinway are different. If the Fazioli you will record on is well prepped and tuned IMO you will be satisfied with the result.
That said if you are not accustomed to Fazioli as you are to Steinway then you should allow more time to practice on that particular Fazioli.

Fazioli is as good as Steinway. Steinway is as good as Fazioli. They're all as good as C. Bechstein, Blüthner, Bösendorfer... the point is, they're all different.

I've played two Faziolis side by side that were prepared differently, and they were night and day, so it also depends on how the piano has been prepared.

I would say that Fazioli surpasses Steinway in terms of the level of care and precision in the construction of the pianos (ie, fit and finish). Beyond that, it's really up to the preferences of the player and/or listener. As a broad stereotype, Faziolis display more clarity than Steinways, but perhaps not as much tonal color. That being said, I've heard and played Faziolis that felt a little dry and clinical, and I've played Faziolis that felt limitless in their expressive capabilities. Same can be said for Steinways. I tend to prefer the stereotypical 'house sound' of Steinway over that of Fazioli.

I'm a sucker for classic things. By that alone, I prefer Steinway. I also find the Fazioli aesthetic to be ugly. Modern bench, modern looking font, bright bubinga interior... No thanks.

I've been to a couple of Fazioli gigs recently. I found in both cases that the bottom end was extremely clear and powerful, and the top end, while being very clear, was perhaps slightly lacking. It, of course could have been the venues or the players, however it was two different venues and two different players.

At one of the gigs, I spoke to the player afterwards about the piano, and he said that apparently Faziolis are hand-crafted to a greater extent than any other make.

That is doubtful. It is also doubtful that would be to the make's advantage.

I'm not even sure how one measures the degree of "hand-madeness."

Does the craftsman who uses no tools whatsoever define the theoretical perfect score?

One would think that tools might actually make the product better, and that better tools are to be preferred to tools that are less good.

Then again, I'm a philosopher, not an engineer....

Fazioli is probably much LESS handmade, they use a lot of CNC machinery which makes the pianos more consistent. This is a good thing. A lot of pianists I know agree with me that they beat Steinway any day.

They beat new Steinways for consistency. So does Yamaha. How they compare in terms of sound and action are different questions, and the answers will vary greatly among different specimens (even of Faziolis).

"Better" can mean a lot.

Are Faziolis better as music instruments? Maybe.
Are they better at impressing people who don't know much about music? Probably not.

Even musically less knowledgeable people often know the name Steinway.
When you tell them "I own a Steinway", they might be more likely to utter "ooohs" and "aaahs" in admiration, than when you tell them "I own a Fazioli", where they might reply: "Nice. I like Ravioli as well. They taste good."

nice.

Shigeru Kawai beats both of them

Nope.