\"\"
Piano Forum logo

Steinway, Steinwas - and now, "Steinnot" (Read 1867 times)

Offline michael_sayers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1252
Steinway, Steinwas - and now, "Steinnot"
« on: June 02, 2015, 10:44:35 AM »
Hi Everyone,

I am disappointed that anyone would do what Robert Estrin reports in this recent video. Buyers who aren't familiar with pianos even moreso need to acquire some basic knowledge and experience.




Mvh,
Michael

Offline lhorwinkle

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 179
Re: Steinway, Steinwas - and now, "Steinnot"
«Reply #1 on: June 03, 2015, 11:30:51 AM »
Why are you disappointed? People in the business are in a position to know about such scams. Are you suggesting that the information presented is not correct?

Offline michael_sayers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1252
Re: Steinway, Steinwas - and now, "Steinnot"
«Reply #2 on: June 03, 2015, 02:22:21 PM »
Why are you disappointed? People in the business are in a position to know about such scams. Are you suggesting that the information presented is not correct?

Hi Lhorwinkle,

I suggest that the information is correct as far as it goes, and I am disappointed that piano sellers would do things such as are described by Robert Estrin in that video.


Mvh,
Michael

Offline visitor

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5093
Re: Steinway, Steinwas - and now, "Steinnot"
«Reply #3 on: June 03, 2015, 02:36:19 PM »
hence why i'd rather get a Charles Walter (on top of preferring as a better instrument for my personal tastes - little chance people would bother faking it, and it's a small familybusiness, they could easily verify the instrument via quick phone call if standard checks didn't pan out) distant 2nd choice Mason Hamlin, Steiny would be a draw for 3rd between Baldwin (unless it's a late pre gibson SF-40; love that thing, the kids in Alabama really knew what they were doing, i'd place an sf-40 ahead of the steiny B).

Offline michael_sayers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1252
Re: Steinway, Steinwas - and now, "Steinnot"
«Reply #4 on: June 03, 2015, 05:43:10 PM »
hence why i'd rather get a Charles Walter (on top of preferring as a better instrument for my personal tastes - little chance people would bother faking it, and it's a small familybusiness, they could easily verify the instrument via quick phone call if standard checks didn't pan out) distant 2nd choice Mason Hamlin, Steiny would be a draw for 3rd between Baldwin (unless it's a late pre gibson SF-40; love that thing, the kids in Alabama really knew what they were doing, i'd place an sf-40 ahead of the steiny B).

Hi Visitor,

It seems that we have similar preferences in pianos.

I quite like the old, American made Baldwin concert grands with the Baldwin [not Renner] hammers and the profundo bass/crystalline treble some but not all of those instruments had.  Baldwin way back in the 20th century made very nice concert grands. I think there were even a small number years when most concert pianists preferred Baldwin to S. & S.



And this one is an American made Baldwin, too - although, as you can hear, it has the hammers made by Renner, so the old sound isn't there and the hammers tend to "yell" with a strained sound at fortissimo.



A N.Y. Steinway D offers a larger range of colours than did the American made Baldwin concert grands, and also a treble that doesn't thin out as much going up the keyboard.

The Mason & Hamlin concert grands had a lovely sound all of their own.

I've never played a Charles Walter, so I can't say much about them.


Mvh,
Michael