Yes I agree with both those points, especially no.2. I guess my impression is that Wayne Stuart could have and should have been the bigger person here. I see it as far more embarrassing for him given his age and reputation. The youtube kid is only 19 after all. Most of us were making a lot of mistakes at that age.

Thanks, I thought it was unnecessary also.

Apparently an Internet spat brings a firestorm of different opinions and some snarkiness here. I’ve watched YouTube reviews and demonstrations of products but personally don’t find them too useful. I prefer reading reviews and critiques. Unfortunately the Bronze Age is over and everything is on YouTube. Apparently, lots of people watch James’s YouTube channel and enjoy his reviews. You can comment and probably correct his errors on piano maintenance. Or send him an email like Wayne Stuart did. Apparently James’s YouTube channel has a following and this can be a great way to get more young folks interested in pianos. I think Wayne Stuart handled his email response poorly. Too Bad really. I don’t equate Wayne Stuart’s email lack of politeness with building bad pianos but many people do. OTOH - sometimes bad publicity spreads the word 10 times faster than good publicity. I think this Internet spat brought more attention on this forum than the announcement of the latest Stuart & Sons 108 key piano with 4 pedals.

I agree.

BUT what I'd have liked to have seen - and Mr YouTuber didn't give us, was HIS email to Wayne Stuart.

I understand how a mature man could react to a 19yr old kid somehow requesting that he magically provide a piano which just wasn't available - when it's fairly obvious to anyone that there isn't one available in most countries.

There was a Stuart and Son 7'6" piano at the showroom where I bought my GROTRIAN. I played it quite a few times, but it's a very special piano.

Personally - I enjoyed it, but didn't understand it, it had a unique, very mature sound as well as action. The more I played it, the more I appreciated it, but didn't feel it was "MY" piano. Maybe if I was younger, and wanting to embark on a learning curve, but it wasn't a retirement piano for me.

Someone looking for a Steinway, Bosendorfer, Shigeru, Grotrian or M&H et al - would very likely not appreciate it - and that's what I suspect Mr YouTuber would have done with it.

I seem to remember he does read out his original email to Wayne Stuart at some point.

I just checked and "Mome Rath" is still available as a screen name. Somebody's going to jump on it!

Larry.

What about "Moocher?"

Commission one of my pianos, kid, and you can say anything you like about it after paying for it. 😆

Please spare me ! Have you seen how very badly most reviewers play on youtube!
By comparison James does very well ! He probably just needs more time to practice.
If Stuart pianos are really worthwhile why would there be a problem?
It would be more exposure for them which would be good.

Wayne Stuart shows very poor judgement here. Whatever temporary satisfaction his rude email may have given him is far outweighed by the negative publicity to him and his company. At his age he should realize it is often better to say nothing than to reply in the fashion he did. Another example that age doesn’t always equal wisdom.

I am always glad when I see young people like James doing something with thier music.
Just recently I had piano students do all thier piano exams ,play at festivals, concerts then
go to university and never play again !

I may be looking at this all wrong. I love trying out pianos. Maybe I should pack my DSLR/video camera and visit piano shops wherever I travel and do YouTube reviews of all my favorites. I really don’t have to know what I’m talking about just give the piano dealer free air time. Oh, and I’ll ask the salesperson for all the special features. Everyone’s happy! I get to go to piano stores and play and the piano dealer gets free publicity. I’m already used to snarky comments about my piano skills and lack thereof. Ive certainly taken crappy critical emails. As long as it’s not from the person who writes my paycheck, who cares? And since I’m retired my paychecks are guaranteed.

The young man seems to enjoy music, pianos and life in general and seems to have a gift that allows him to share this with other people - really can’t see how he deserves a reply worded like that - a simple “no but thank you for taking an interest” would have been appropriate.

Ah well - sticks and stones

Wow, I've just read this entire thread. The only thing missing was popcorn. That's my way of saying I agree with the SpongeBob GIF.

Okay, to throw yet another opinion on this fire. I'm not convinced any publicity from this little spat would necessarily be bad for Wayne Stuart. The people who can afford his pianos probably wouldn't be paying James any attention, he has an internet following but he never demonstrates truly impressive piano playing ability. When I see a video of him playing Feux Follets or La Campanella then I'll be impressed.

As to whether Wayne Stuart could have acted more maturely, my opinion is, without a doubt. It seems we are in an age of internet influencers and that trend isn't going away soon. For now I believe it's safe to assume that Stuart's target audience isn't influenced by this trend and in the future given the short memory of the internet there's probably no danger to acting like an ass. Still it's not being your best and in my experience the world is a friendlier place when that is your goal. However, given my age I've discovered that I'm just as capable of being an ass. It doesn't happen often, but I know it does and therefore I tend to be forgiving of other's ass episodes.

Finally, the reasons given for denying James' request are entirely valid wealthy patrons probably have zero interest in internet influencers (excluding Kardashians, of course), but that's no excuse for Wayne's ass episode. Still he might have been ill (or hungover) we'll never know. As for James, he didn't need to play the hurt child either. I'm guessing he saw being slammed by Wayne Stuart as an opportunity for his "brand" and in my mind posting the video is proof of exactly that. All in all it's kind of a sad situation of bad behavior on everyone's part.

Oh my, I didn't know that in order to be capable to assess piano's qualities, one must play impressive pieces! I also didn't know that Feux Follets and La Campanella are THE pieces that should get us impressed. What a petty and shallow judgement.

Probably next time I see a shop owner reviewing an instrument and playing something that's not La Campanella, I should let him know that unless his piano skill improves, I'm not buying the instrument. What a ridiculous idea.

Yeah, taken in isolation, the sentiment that you need serious piano chops to properly evaluate a piano is a bit silly.

That said, James doesn't really demonstrate much understanding of how pianos work beyond the average layman, and that makes the quality of his reviews a bit... superficial. It's great that he's enthusiastic about trying all sorts of different pianos, but the information he offers about them isn't particularly insightful.

I don't intend to escalate the intensity of this debate but I must say I am somewhat annoyed by the Youtuber defenders in this post. Steve Chandler took time and clearly put thought into writing a longer response, whether you agree with him or not you cannot just pick out one sentence and then immediately label his whole response "petty and shallow". To me that is petty and shallow.

Steve Chandler clearly stated that he disagrees with the way Stuart responded to James' email. He even described the behavior as "acting like an ass". Is that still not clear enough for you? What else do you want? Why are these defenders so difficult to please?

In the end I hope this can be the common ground:

(1) James is a passionate young man who contributes to the Youtube world by letting a wide audience see and hear many beautiful pianos. He also has some playing skills.

(2) Wayne Stuart's way of responding to James' request is rude and inappropriate.

(3) Wayne Stuart has every right to dislike James' review style (namely tedious and lengthy, and oftentimes with inaccurate information), therefore don't want his pianos to appear in James' reviews.

(4) James' speculation that Stuart doesn't want him to review mainly because Stuart worries some of the flaws of the piano may get exposed, is clearly wrong. The whole thing is purely about his review style, that's it.

1. Some reviewers or sales people do play worse than James but that doesn't mean he shows enough skill to be able to evaluate pianos at a high level. If you read the reviews of specific pianos in the Piano Buyer, the evaluators are usually very high level professionals. IMO the best or most meaningful reviews are by high level pianists or high level techs.
2. Having far from an expert do a review of a very high level piano(or any piano for that matter) can pose potential problems for the manufacturer.

All of you sound like something terribly bad would happen if James got his hands on one of Stuart's pianos...well, as far as I know, we live in democracy (not sure about down there, but here in the US we definitely do) and nobody, not even a manufacturer, can tell anyone "you can NOT review my piano". Now let's rephrase what you just said in a sighty different way...

Since he's not an expert on movies, his review of this movie can pose potential problems for the movie maker, no, it's he has every right not wanting his movie to be reviewed by this youtuber.
Since he's not a pro gamer, his review of this videogame can pose potential problems for the game maker. No, we shouldn't allow him to play this game.
Since he's not a pro racer, his review of this car can pose potential problems for the car manufacturer. No, it wouldn't be wise to allow him to drive this car.

Whether you like it or not, we live in a free world where people can do what they want, as long as they don't break laws. If Stuart didn't want his piano to be reviewed, he shouldn't've let it out of the assembly line. Stuart's hissy tantrum might only hinder the review, but James might eventually find a willing owner anyway. What will Mr. Stuart do then? Show up at the owner's house and threathen him not to make the review?

Yes but his reviews are for layman. Like a young person saying do you like this piano ,shall I
play you something (even if much more work is needed on the Chopin)I think we should understand
his reviews are not technical.To compair the Stuart piano to a Bösendorfer because of the extra notes may be naive but then the Stuart manufacturer are also naive for fearing such a comparison.
I realise he should not have played the hurt child and rather ignor the whole thing.

There are tens of thousands of reviews of movie so most people are not going to place much emphasis on a single review. A movie review is more like a review of a commonly bought product on Amazom.

In addition, specific information in a piano review can be factually wrong to the detriment of a manufacturer. One extreme example would be the claim of "inferior plastic parts" in Kawai pianos. I think lots of makers might not want to accommodate a random person who wanted to do a video review their pianos unless they knew ahead of time the review would be positive and accurate.

There is a difference between allowing and making a special accommodation(which is what James wanted for this piano). If Stuart & Sons was available at dealers and the dealer allowed James to do the video I don't think the maker could prevent it.