Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums Over 3 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments. Over 100,000 members from around the world.
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!
Well, I don't know. I've played old completely rebuild grand pianos and they have a characteristic sound that to me is not as full as modern grand. Like I said the sound is maybe a little lighter, less full. Maybe it's a design factor like lighter hammers used in older designs for example, but the older designs don't sound like modern pianos to me. Here's an example of a vintage piano. I think the SX shares more in common tonally with this rebuilt 100 year old Chickering than it does with the modern Yamaha CF-6. The tones of all 3 pianos are beautiful just different.
If a piano is rebuilt it may not have the lighter hammers you mentioned. In fact, my impression is that is done only/mostly when someone asks for an historically accurate rebuild. Because of this and every other decision made in its rebuilding, whatever sound characteristics you hear in the Chickering may not have much to do with how the piano originally sounded.
Older Sound A few examples of knowable "vintage" sound have come up on the forum recently. One was the 1880s Chickering at La Grua discovered in original condition after more a century in a New England attic.
If that piano is 120 years old, I don't think it would sound the same as when it was originally built. I think the only way a piano might sound the way it did when originally built is if there was a 100% historically accurate and complete rebuild.
Well, I don't know. I've played old completely rebuild grand pianos and they have a characteristic sound that to me is not as full as modern grand. Like I said the sound is maybe a little lighter, less full. Maybe it's a design factor like lighter hammers used in older designs for example, but the older designs don't sound like modern pianos to me. Here's an example of a vintage piano. I think the SX shares more in common tonally with this rebuilt 100 year old Chickering than it does with the modern Yamaha CF-6. The tones of all 3 pianos are beautiful just different.
If a piano is rebuilt it may not have the lighter hammers you mentioned. In fact, my impression is that is done only/mostly when someone asks for an historically accurate rebuild. Because of this and every other decision made in its rebuilding, whatever sound characteristics you hear in the Chickering may not have much to do with how the piano originally sounded.
I think you are missing the point. It precisely because these pianos are vintage ie. old and with aged wood is what gives them their warm unique tones. How they sounded when they were new was not what Yamaha was after. They were after what drew certain pianists to warm tones of aged vintage pianos. That was the entire premise behind the ARES process- to accelerate the aging process of the woods to get that unique sound.
Older Sound A few examples of knowable "vintage" sound have come up on the forum recently. One was the 1880s Chickering at La Grua discovered in original condition after more a century in a New England attic.
If that piano is 120 years old, I don't think it would sound the same as when it was originally built. I think the only way a piano might sound the way it did when originally built is if there was a 100% historically accurate and complete rebuild.
That Chickering did not need to be rebuilt, it had scarcely been played in and said to be still in tune. It has only just received its final voicing.
Ian Russell Schiedmayer & Soehne, 1925 Model 14, 140cm Ibach, 1905 F-IV, 235cm
Older Sound A few examples of knowable "vintage" sound have come up on the forum recently. One was the 1880s Chickering at La Grua discovered in original condition after more a century in a New England attic.
If that piano is 120 years old, I don't think it would sound the same as when it was originally built. I think the only way a piano might sound the way it did when originally built is if there was a 100% historically accurate and complete rebuild.
That Chickering did not need to be rebuilt, it had scarcely been played in and said to be still in tune. It has only just received its final voicing.
I think a piano changes tone a lot just by sitting around for 120 years no matter how little is was played.
Well, I don't know. I've played old completely rebuild grand pianos and they have a characteristic sound that to me is not as full as modern grand. Like I said the sound is maybe a little lighter, less full. Maybe it's a design factor like lighter hammers used in older designs for example, but the older designs don't sound like modern pianos to me. Here's an example of a vintage piano. I think the SX shares more in common tonally with this rebuilt 100 year old Chickering than it does with the modern Yamaha CF-6. The tones of all 3 pianos are beautiful just different.
If a piano is rebuilt it may not have the lighter hammers you mentioned. In fact, my impression is that is done only/mostly when someone asks for an historically accurate rebuild. Because of this and every other decision made in its rebuilding, whatever sound characteristics you hear in the Chickering may not have much to do with how the piano originally sounded.
I think you are missing the point. It precisely because these pianos are vintage ie. old and with aged wood is what gives them their warm unique tones. How they sounded when they were new was not what Yamaha was after. They were after what drew certain pianists to warm tones of aged vintage pianos. That was the entire premise behind the ARES process- to accelerate the aging process of the woods to get that unique sound.
What you say is possible, but I have major doubts that the age of the wood in the case affects the tone. Before this Yamaha experiment I never heard any of the major rebuilders claim their pianos had a beautiful tone due to the age of the wood in the case. They did sometimes claim (non rebuilders usually don't agree) that the older plates found in Steinway rebuilds were one reason why their rebuilt Steinways sounded so special. Having played many rebuilt Steinways I have not noticed anything typical about their tone vs. new Steinways, If the ARES process is applied to the soundboard I can see how it might affect the tone.
I have major doubts that the age of the wood in the case affects the tone.
Yamaha have changed the properties of the wood not its age. The question here is whether the properties of the wood in the rim affect tone.
Yamaha’s Wood Reforming Technology for Acoustic Guitars Acoustic Resonance Enhancement (A.R.E.) is a technology which Yamaha developed to alter the resonant qualities of wood. The technology was derived from the Company’s basic materials research conducted on the properties of wood, a basic component in a wide range of musical instruments. By carefully controlling the temperature, humidity and pressure, which affect the micro-structure of wood, the molecular properties of the wood can actually be manipulated to match the ideal acoustic conditions of the wood in an instrument that has been played for decades. The process uses no harmful chemicals, and is therefore environmentally friendly. Guitars which are made using this technology have superior resonance and vibration characteristics, sustaining tones in the low- and mid-ranges while delivering increased high-range response and shorter delay after the attack. This gives the guitars clearer notes with no discordant harmonic overtones and a warm, “vintage” sound quality.
I have major doubts that the age of the wood in the case affects the tone.
Yamaha have changed the properties of the wood not its age. The question here is whether the properties of the wood in the rim affect tone.
When I said age of the wood I meant the effective age of the wood due to ARE.
The article you quoted talked about guitars. If I'm not mistaken, the guitar case acts like the soundboard of a piano so the guitar to piano case analogy may not be valid. They'd have to test two pianos where everything was the same except the case wood to see if ARE changed the tone. Since the CS series has the CF soundboard but different hammers they couldn't compare those two. Nor can they compare CS to CX since more than the case wood is different.
I'm certainly not saying Yamaha isn't correct about their claims about the effect of ARE wood in the CS series rims. I'm only saying based on what I've read so far on this thread it doesn't seem clear to me.
If Yamaha is correct about the effect of aged wood in the case, it seems surprising that piano rebuilders haven't been mentioning this for years.
They'd have to test two pianos where everything was the same except the case wood to see if ARE changed the tone.
In the video (1:50 onwards) the Yamaha engineers say they made 50 rim prototypes. They say well-dried wood has similar resonances to the wood in the older instruments. It would not surprise me if they turn their attention to the soundboard next.
Ian Russell Schiedmayer & Soehne, 1925 Model 14, 140cm Ibach, 1905 F-IV, 235cm
I have major doubts that the age of the wood in the case affects the tone.
Yamaha have changed the properties of the wood not its age. The question here is whether the properties of the wood in the rim affect tone.
When I said age of the wood I meant the effective age of the wood due to ARE.
The article you quoted talked about guitars. If I'm not mistaken, the guitar case acts like the soundboard of a piano so the guitar to piano case analogy may not be valid. They'd have to test two pianos where everything was the same except the case wood to see if ARE changed the tone. Since the CS series has the CF soundboard but different hammers they couldn't compare those two. Nor can they compare CS to CX since more than the case wood is different.
I'm certainly not saying Yamaha isn't correct about their claims about the effect of ARE wood in the CS series rims. I'm only saying based on what I've read so far on this thread it doesn't seem clear to me.
If Yamaha is correct about the effect of aged wood in the case, it seems surprising that piano rebuilders haven't been mentioning this for years.
Yamaha has 5 different levels of piano goodness in their inventory at 5 different price points. The only way to really measure improvement would be to test an S3x to an S4BB, up the S and SX line. Some improvement must be evident or why would they bother to incorporate it into the making of a beautiful piano as the S series? It’s also a sales talking point with graphs and pretty pictures. I hate to admit this, but I’m an easy target if you show me pretty pictures with graphs. If a sharp salesperson tells me long enough, I will hear considerable improvement in sound on the SX series. How much improvement Pianoloverus or gwing hears is unknown. It just adds to the debate about what’s the best piano. My question would be if ARE improved the guitars soundboard, why not use that process on the soundboard instead of the rim?
Last edited by j&j; 04/10/2110:27 AM.
J & J Estonia L190 Hidden Beauty Casio Privia P230 At least half the waiters in Nashville play better than I
Or both. The quitar makers who are using torrefied lumber are primarily using it for the soundboard. These are made from spruce of many varieties, but it is the same wood that is used in piano soundboards. So it would seem that what is good for the goose is good for the gander.
fine grand piano custom rebuilding, piano technician and tuner
My question would be if ARE improved the guitars soundboard, why not use that process on the soundboard instead of the rim?
To hazard a guess, the brief was to use the standard CX platform for a premium model, like car manufacturers modifying body panels. That leaves the rim and the hammers.
Soundboards next?
Yamaha are aiming to attract professionals. Do you think they will succeed?
Last edited by Withindale; 04/10/2112:12 PM.
Ian Russell Schiedmayer & Soehne, 1925 Model 14, 140cm Ibach, 1905 F-IV, 235cm
ARE is just marketing BS. It’s a new process introduced to cut cost for soundboard drying. There is no correlation between ARE and vintage pianos.
Piano: 1982 NY Steinway Model B, Yamaha AvantGrand N3X VST(preference in order): VSL Synchron Pianos, Vienna Imperial, Garritan CFX, VI Labs Modern U, Ivory II American Concert D, Pianoteq
I think this is why I think it would be wise for Yamaha to market the SX series pianos as a premium piano targeted toward's a niche of pianists who are looking for that "vintage" sound. If they were to market it just as a premium piano but difficult to significantly differentiate from the CX line of pianos I think it would be a hard sell especially when you can find other premium pianos from Shigeru or Estonia for example that nearly completely hand-built on separate production lines but without the premium price tag comparatively speaking.
I don't think there's such a thing as a vintage sound. The sound of older pianos differs by make and isn't even clearly knowable because the older brands have either been rebuilt or in such poor condition they don't sound like they did at the beginning of their life.
No piano is nearly completely hand built. Many steps in piano making are, in fact, better done by computer assisted machines. Some better pianos do have more time spent on the parts that are better done by hand compared to lesser pianos.
Having owned vintage pianos and having played many modern pianos, I can say that there definitely is a vintage style of tone and there definitely is a modern style of tone. That does not mean that every vintage piano sounds the same or every modern piano sounds the same.
Reading Piano World with Javascript turned off (no logins, no ads, fast response times). I will receive PMs.
![[Linked Image]](https://forum.pianoworld.com//gallery/42/full/14800.jpg)
![[Linked Image]]( https://forum.pianoworld.com//gallery/42/medium/12292.png)
