Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 66.108.4.183 (talk) at 00:39, 24 June 2006 (→POV). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Is Steinway the name of a place? The article seems to suggest that, but it's hard to tell. Is it is a place name, then where is it? I would have expected this article to be about the piano makers, but I suppose that might live at Steinway Company or something if this is indeed a place. I keep meaning to expand the piano related entries, not got round to it yet. --Camembert

Don't think it's the name of a place. It's just one Herr or Mister Steinway and his extended family.

POV

The article contains claims that would seem more appropriate in an advertising spiel - e.g. saying that their pianos are better than any others, for whatever reason. I doubt if this was ever the case.

Quote from The Economist: 'Since 1853, artists have praised their instruments. Claude Debussy remarked that piano music should only be written for Bechsteins. For Wilhelm Furtwängler, Blüthner was best. “Blüthner pianos can really sing, which is the most wonderful thing you can say about a piano.”'

One thing missing is the Steinway Artist programme: this was a scheme set up after WWII with the effect of virtually forcing every concert hall to buy a Steinway.

Another quote from The Economist: "Meanwhile, Steinway thrived in America, establishing a near-monopoly in concert grands. Most attribute Steinway's success to clever marketing as well as to the quality of its pianos. (...)

Steinway is also skilful at marrying pianists to the brand, and there is an official roster of about 1,300 “Steinway artists”, from Alfred Brendel to Billy Joel. Musicians must own a Steinway to become a member of the club; in return, the nearest local salesroom will provide a piano wherever they are performing."

I just don't think Wiki should say or imply that one brand of piano is superior to all others. --Tdent 14:26, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Brand worship will be crushed and destroyed. Shawnc 08:25, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Although claiming that Steinways are the best violates NPOV, it is generally true. In an attempt to log the thoughts of the time, one could mention that when the average pianist is asked which is the best brand, most say Steinway. Many schools and institutions claim to be "all-Steinway" schools, which is a mark of distinction. While being careful to not violate NPOV, it should be stated that most pianists do think they are the best. -Chewbacca 09:05, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

"when the average pianist is asked which is the best brand, most say Steinway." tosh. pianists like different pianos for different reasons. saying that is like saying that 'Bach was 'the best' composer.' obviously, that's not true. he has his merits like any other composer, but one cannot expect to label any of them as 'the best.' much like composers, a pianist's choice of piano is simply a matter of personal taste. i have never met a serious pianist who would say 'steinway pianos are THE BEST.' however, i have met many who say 'i prefer steinways.' equally, i have met many people who say 'i prefer becksteins.' it is so false to talk of 'best and worst' in this context. i personally own two pianos - a bluthner and a steinway. which one i play depends on the type of music i am playing. the subtle and light bluthner is, i find, better for playing wishy washy impressionism, whereas the stentorian steinway is great for more percussive music, like prokofiev or grieg. faced with something light and classical, like mozart or hayden, i would prefer the enormous dynamic range of a yamaha. which piano one prefers is a matter of the type of music one is playing, and one's personal taste. so whoever is soapboxing for Steinway in the article either works for the company, is a trendy piano-fascist or doesnt know the first thing about pianos. it makes me wince when people talk of 'the best.' rant over. thanks for listening.

I don't know whether the article has been ammended since the above posted their comments, but it does not say anywhere that Steinway is the best, or "the finest." There is little, if any, violation of NPOV here. Furthermore, some of the comments above are in error: Steinway does not insist that a Steinway artist own a Steinway; but I believe that the company gives a piano to an artist when he signs on, at least to the most-desired artists, and the youngest at time of signing. While it is indeed true that pressure is placed on pianists to become Steinway artists because they know that they will have difficulty finding good Concert Grands when they play in smaller towns without Steinway's services, one must also realize that the reason why Steinway was able to offer these services was that the overwhelming number of concert venues had already owned Steinway instruments by the time such persuasion was able to exist. Having said that, it is the case--and the article makes this clear--that Steinway instruments have suffered a major loss in quality, relative to other pianos. I myself have owned and played on many different manufacturers' instruments and, while I believe that the pianos that Steinway manufactured up until about 1955 were mostly superb instruments, I think that the threat to Steinway today comes more from companies like Yamaha and Baldwin, than from Bosendorfer, whose instruments, while producing a more bell-like tone, have a much more limited range of tonal color and volume. The most recent Yamahas and Bladwins truly do remind one of the Steinways of the golden age of the 1920s through the 1940s. My opinions, for what they're worth. 66.108.4.183 00:39, 24 June 2006 (UTC) Allen Roth