Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

Rachmaninoff Piano Concerto #3: a Fazioli experience


Recommended Posts

Last night, our local symphony orchestra played the Rach #3 with the exceptional kind of pianist one needs for this piece. The orchestra's standard piano is a Steinway D, perhaps unsurprisingly. During the changeover to the second half of the program, however, I was pleasantly surprised to see a padded cover with the Fazioli logo on it make its way to center stage. A 278. My tickets are like 8 rows back, center stage, so just about optimal for what was about to happen. This would be my first time hearing the Fazioli in a concerto context.

 

I have played Fazioli pianos in multiple dealers around the US and Europe. Every time I've had a near religious experience on them. Curiously, the recorded tone never seems as good. But in person, I have enjoyed them a lot. After playing the Stuart & Sons and playing an action that good on a far more expressive and capable instrument, I think I decided that much of the player experience on the Fazioli is those wonderful actions. And likely for improvisation, the clarity of the instrument. It doesn't make as many overtones, and so is a bit "cleaner" for extended harmonies. Maybe that is why Herbie likes it?

 

The orchestra and pianist did a wonderful job. The piano was definitely the weakest part of it for me. I was prepared to like it, and wanted to find it so. But I didn't and couldn't. I found the piano to be thin and very dynamically restricted. The Rach #3 is "big music", and the piano needs to have interest, color and expression in the f to fff range. This instrument seemed flat to me. From about f onward, it didn't develop any additional character, and just didn't really get louder. I like a lot of non-Steinway pianos, and am not beholden to its "house sound". But for this kind of music, the extra harmonic richness and color that a good Steinway has would have added a lot to this. Big drama music and big drama pianos do go together.

 

I may be the only music nerd in the audience that listened with eyes closed to most of it, and found the piano sound wanting. But I could tell that she was putting everything into it, but the sound wasn't changing. I don't know what she was hearing in front of the instrument. But I don't think that particular instrument was in the best setting for its capabilities.

 

Pianos are endlessly fascinating, unique and wonderful. That same piano in some other musical context might well be the most perfect thing imaginable. The challenge with pianos is that they ARE all unique, and while any concert grand will certainly facilitate advanced music, a particular instrument might or might not be the best thing. And few of us are in any position to own several, let alone tailor them to repertoire like a guitarist might - having several on stage to choose from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Replies 19
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I have played Fazioli pianos in multiple dealers around the US and Europe. Every time I've had a near religious experience on them. Curiously, the recorded tone never seems as good. But in person, I have enjoyed them a lot. After playing the Stuart & Sons and playing an action that good on a far more expressive and capable instrument, I think I decided that much of the player experience on the Fazioli is those wonderful actions. And likely for improvisation, the clarity of the instrument. It doesn't make as many overtones, and so is a bit "cleaner" for extended harmonies. Maybe that is why Herbie likes it?

 

Nathanael,

Am confused, did you mean the Stuart and Sons is a "far more expressive and capable instrument"? or the Fazoli? Obviously you love the action on the Fazoli.

 

Am curious 'cause S&S talks about how old the piano technology is, and that they've innovated with it. Would be curious to hear about your experience with the S&S grand.

 

That's surprising that they would bring a less 'dynamic' piano out. I'm sure you wanted to play this Fazoli and confirm that the sound is there when up close, but doesn't project.

 

Randy

 

 

Numa Piano X73 /// Kawai ES920 /// Casio CT-X5000 /// Yamaha EW425

Yamaha Melodica and Alto Recorder

QSC K8.2 // JBL Eon One Compact // Soundcore Motion Boom Plus 

Win10 laptop i7 8GB // iPad Pro 9.7" 32GB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you ever seen the documentary on the piano technicians behind the Chopin competition? I think it's called Tuning The Battle or something. They follow around a Fazoli technician who is Japanese and started at Yamaha then moved to Steinway and is now with Fazoli. It's absolutely fascinating.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you ever seen the documentary on the piano technicians behind the Chopin competition? I think it's called Tuning The Battle or something. They follow around a Fazoli technician who is Japanese and started at Yamaha then moved to Steinway and is now with Fazoli. It's absolutely fascinating.

I have! In fact, I was thinking of that documentary during the concert last night. I thought, often the competition music is also very "big music" and I wonder if this exact same thing is happening to me now!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Nathanael,

Am confused, did you mean the Stuart and Sons is a "far more expressive and capable instrument"? or the Fazoli? Obviously you love the action on the Fazoli.

 

Am curious 'cause S&S talks about how old the piano technology is, and that they've innovated with it. Would be curious to hear about your experience with the S&S grand.

 

That's surprising that they would bring a less 'dynamic' piano out. I'm sure you wanted to play this Fazoli and confirm that the sound is there when up close, but doesn't project.

 

Randy

 

 

I meant that the Stuart & Sons is a more expressive and capable instrument. I cover the "why" extensively on my blog.. You can hear me play the piano there, though I was jet lagged and not really doing anything particularly interesting or amazing. Certainly not playing advanced classical literature. But I did spend hours with the instrument, alone and unhurried.

 

And yes, I am always happy to play high-end pianos!

 

I do know that Wayne Stuart told me that they took recordings in a 360 circle around the piano and made modifications to how the plate was installed and netted a 1-2dB improvement in volume at the player position. So projection is not something that can just be assumed because there is a lid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point it"s customary to blame the sound engineer...

Well, with a live symphonic ensemble, I'm afraid there's no faulting engineers, and if the playing is happening, then the instrument is the logical conclusion...

I think that was the joke.... :)

Now out! "Mind the Gap," a 24-song album of new material.
www.joshweinstein.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whenever I do sit down at Pierre's place and play any of his instruments , they all have a transcending effect. The 278 can be an out of body experience for sure. Whether I would prefer just that particular sound, all the time and forever, over what I am extremely fortunate to own, I don't think so.

 

This has been my universal experience. They are the most even, excellent playing pianos that I have experienced. I have found Steinways in all kinds of conditions. I've had rapturous experiences on Bosendorfers, and played ones that didn't do anything special for me. But the Fazioli's have always been excellent.

 

Jeffery Kahane's last gig was conducting the San Francisco symphony... When he moved, he left his 278 here in the Bay area at the dealer to be sold. I saw the ad - they took pains to point out it had been his.

 

I did have a play on a 278 they had several years ago. It was a remarkable instrument. It was identical to the 228 in every way, except that bass... oh the bass of a nice long concert grand... You know - having a D. That extra bit from a 7.5' piano just does magical things at the very low end. The price difference at the time was $50k. And in my imaginary pocketbook, I got up from the 278 and thought, "and I would pay that $50k without question!".

 

The finest piano I have played is unquestionably the Stuart and Son's 102 key instrument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wowsies, your write-up was exquisite. Of course there were technical aspects that you were able to comment on, but you went way beyond and I doubt few could come close to your eloquence on the subject!

 

I actually contacted S&S some time ago and asked WHY there wasn't more marketing lit on their site that demonstrated why their pianos were unique. After their opening statement of pianos not progressing for the last hundred years or so, it seemed weird that that was the case. I said, among other things, that reviews from end users are a legitimate way of tooting your own horn. Well, with you, they've got quite the horn player! At least in my persusal back then, I didn't hear them talking about obvious things like how the strings were attached, giving you longer sustain, or the modifications to the sound board

 

What I also don't get is why there are not more of these pianos out in the world. I've never heard of one being used in a concert hall, and from the sound of it, acoustic projection is what these beauties were made for. Also haven't heard any prices mentioned. I imagine their 9' would be a beast to transport!

 

So the Fazoli has a remarkable action?

Numa Piano X73 /// Kawai ES920 /// Casio CT-X5000 /// Yamaha EW425

Yamaha Melodica and Alto Recorder

QSC K8.2 // JBL Eon One Compact // Soundcore Motion Boom Plus 

Win10 laptop i7 8GB // iPad Pro 9.7" 32GB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, the Fazioli actions and general fit and finish are quite superior to what comes out of the Steinway factory these days. They are shockingly even from model to model. It seems like all that changes is the bass gets better as the pianos get longer. The 228 and 278 are very special pianos. I have not played the giant 308. But based on Wayne's pianos, and comments about piano scaling at the 3m mark, it is likely to be superior in a large degree than the 278. But there are the "special" Steinways where everything comes together and the magic is VERY real. A fine Steinway is a world-class instrument, though they often take work from a skilled tech to get them there.

 

As to why not more Stuart and Sons? Steinway has contracted with most of the major concert halls in a way that largely prohibits new entrants. It is complicated, not transparent, and without hundreds of millions of dollars, one would have a hard time buying in to change the way things work. The number of pianists in the world who can buy and transport their own concert grand is extremely small. The number of amateurs who want something other than a piano shaped Steinway status object is also small. But for those who like pianos, it is a wonderful instrument, fully worth the asking price.

 

The prices are middle of the road for instruments of this caliber. There are more expensive pianos and cheaper pianos at this ultimate level of quality. They are, however, premium instruments. They occupy the same price range as Fazioli, Bosendorfer, The one silver lining is that the USD is strong compared to the AUD, and we have no import duty on pianos from Australia, so that is nice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did have a play on a 278 they had several years ago. It was a remarkable instrument. It was identical to the 228 in every way, except that bass... oh the bass of a nice long concert grand... You know - having a D. That extra bit from a 7.5' piano just does magical things at the very low end. The price difference at the time was $50k. .

 

I've played a 278 and a 228 side by side quite a few times. Yes, you can't that deep a bass without going up to concert grand size. Although the 228 is the best in its size/class I have heard. However I haven't played a newer Hamburg C.

 

But also the middle has a different sound as well on the bigger pianos. Just comparing the D with a B (a 7'er not a 7' 6") , there is a sense of spaciousness and fullness I feel/hear, that I don't get on a B.

 

Less so on the 228 vs the 278. Probably because of the larger scale of the 228.

 

I hear that "concert grand" difference most prominently in the roughly octave and a half under middle C. There is a richness there when the strings can be longer. There is less inharmonicity from the strings because they do not have to be overwound as much. This same thing happens on the Stuart and Sons. It is 9'8" in its 102 key rendition, and the mid/upper bass is just extraordinary. It is also true that the area of the soundboard increases substantially in a larger piano, and that is sure to play into it as well.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did have a play on a 278 they had several years ago. It was a remarkable instrument. It was identical to the 228 in every way, except that bass... oh the bass of a nice long concert grand... You know - having a D. That extra bit from a 7.5' piano just does magical things at the very low end. The price difference at the time was $50k. .

 

I've played a 278 and a 228 side by side quite a few times. Yes, you can't that deep a bass without going up to concert grand size. Although the 228 is the best in its size/class I have heard. However I haven't played a newer Hamburg C.

 

But also the middle has a different sound as well on the bigger pianos. Just comparing the D with a B (a 7'er not a 7' 6") , there is a sense of spaciousness and fullness I feel/hear, that I don't get on a B.

 

Less so on the 228 vs the 278. Probably because of the larger scale of the 228.

 

I hear that "concert grand" difference most prominently in the roughly octave and a half under middle C. There is a richness there when the strings can be longer. There is less inharmonicity from the strings because they do not have to be overwound as much. This same thing happens on the Stuart and Sons. It is 9'8" in its 102 key rendition, and the mid/upper bass is just extraordinary. It is also true that the area of the soundboard increases substantially in a larger piano, and that is sure to play into it as well.

 

Then it would be interesting to hear how good the bass notes sound in a David Rubenstein 12'-2" R-371 piano.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, the Fazioli pianos have a very pure sound, much more so than even Yamaha. They are the exact opposite of the warm full American sound from the S&S, M&H, etc. Some of the Rach preludes would sound wonderful on a Fazioli, but I would think a piano richer in harmonics would fit better for the Rach 2 or 3. Wonderful pianos, but I like a little more growl from my pianos when played aggressively.

NS3C, Hammond XK5, Yamaha S7X, Sequential Prophet 6, Yamaha YC73, Roland Jupiter X

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, the action on the Fazioli is wonderful. I definitely prefer the sound of a Bosendorfer or a "magic" Steinway . In my experience, Steinways can vary a great deal with respect to action (from super heavy to super light) as well as vary widely with respect to tone, but if you find that special one, they are wonderful to play. I am in the market for a baby grand now, and know that my quest can take over a year to find the right piano. Unfortunately, Fazioli's and Bosendorfer's are a little out of my price range. :-)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...