Op-Ed: Pianists and piano music lack sound variety due to long-time branding

While brand related terms, such as "googling" and "xeroxing" are common in many fields today, pianists are luckily not "steinwaying" or "bösendorfering" when they are playing their instrument, they are still just playing the piano. But a large part of piano playing has become brand oriented in the sense of what piano sounds superior for the players, and what merely sounds "good enough for the money" compared to the superior. There is a reason to be critical toward the notion, made by numerous pianists today, that all piano music would be fully achievable only on a Steinway & Sons model D grand piano. If Steinway is the standard – which it often is – it doesn't necessarily mean that Steinway would have created the best piano ever, but that Steinway rather has caught the attention of pianists and composers, who couldn't see the beauty in a pluralistic piano scene. These are two different things. The latter means that composed piano music after the 1850s would not have been written for the piano, but ideally for a Steinway, where every other brand would be a compromise or even a disappointment. Why doesn't anyone write music for a Yamaha U1 upright piano? It's certainly limited in its singing quality and dynamic range, compared to a Steinway D, but isn't it time to look at music a little more widely than simply saying all romantic music (and thus "a singing quality") is a decisive element in an instrument? Let's look at a few facts.

The first piano was introduced during Johann Sebastian Bach's time at the end of the 17th century, and is credited to the Italian expert harpsichord maker Bartolomeo Cristofori. This was a much different sounding instrument compared to pianos today. One hundred years later, Ignaz Pleyel, an Austrian-born French musician and a businessman, started making pianos, after an extensive composing and publishing career. Frédéric Chopin, often regarded as the composer who set the standard for piano music, was provided instruments by Pleyel's factory. The sound of that fortepiano was much thinner compared to the 20th century pianoforte, perhaps also a bit clearer in the lower midrange due to a straight-stringed construction (compared to today's cross-stringed construction technique with longer strings allowing a superior volume but also easily a muddier result, depending on the player of course). Hence, Chopin composed mainly for a Pleyel piano.

Henry Steinway brought a dramatic change to how music could be played on a piano. The dynamic range on the Steinway grand pianos was superior, and comparable to an operatic voice. Sadly, and I'm sure unintentionally, Steinway and his sons put an end to the variety of piano sounds, and all other piano makers have since attempted to follow the sound and dynamic qualities of a Steinway. This is not Steinway's fault. The piano maker of fame has done tremendous engineering advancements and the instruments are fantastic. It is understandable that such a dramatic step up in quality would intimidate other makers, especially after Pleyel, and still do intimidate. A Steinway always sounds good in a concert hall, makes up for badly designed acoustics and sounds full on recordings. All this has set the position of Steinway to where it is today. The only question is, do the other manufacturers (and pianists) lack imagination in regards to other options of sound characteristics and "personality"?

For instance, why couldn't every piano maker, Bechstein, Yamaha, Schimmel, Kawai, Fazzioli, and... even Estonia, make their own proud trademark piano sound, and pianists simply adapt to playing the instrument with its special characteristics? Bösendorfer has its original character, and that's good. My point is that pianists today are caught up by a more-than-a-century old effect of branding, where their ears are geared toward a Steinway and where everything else is indisputably inferior. In a world where Yamahas are manufactured in a far larger quantity, what is it – except branding and a romantic "singing quality" ideal – which gives Steinway the proprietary ownership to the sound of a piano? Or can't classical pianists learn how to play on a variety of instruments in case the instruments sound too far from each other? I love the sound of a Steinway, immensely, but I also enjoy playing on other brands for their unique quality, even on a Wurlitzer (acoustic) or occasionally on a Hellas piano. Every piano is different, and they all got their say in what piano music sounds like. This mindset does not diminish the stature of Steinway, quite the contrary, it strengthens its uniqueness, and consequently the appeal for Steinway for what it is. Composers and pianists just need to be aware of each piano sound, and allow their own sound spectrum – for what a piano can be – to widen a little bit. That also brings in other keyboards, acoustic and electric, into the round table of negotiations when vying for future attention of performance opportunities.