I preferred the M&H, warmer, less metallic sounding. Although I must also say that the camera is twice as close to the Steinway, therefore the sound is considerably louder. Slightly louder is often perceived to sound better and that has been proved many times in blind listening tests. So lets do this again with the same distance for the microphone, and I think more people will hear the true differences between the two. I generally prefer a warmer sound in my home, because its easier to listen to in smaller rooms.
I think the location of the pianos made a difference as well. While I preferred the M & H it would be interesting to see what it sounded like in the middle of the room as opposed to against the wall.
About smaller rooms.... I have a 1915 M&H model AA and my living room is not exactly small, but the sound of the instrument is so strong that I never play it with the lid raised. I even lower the music stand and close the front cover for even less sound. And then, the music from this instrument is spectacular!
@@Ernesto7608 1915 m&h are very different. Different scale, Carbonfiber wng action in the current m&h which is a massive benefit over wood actions as well as different hammers. Not to mention if your 1915 piano hasn't had ware parts replaced, you can get some really loud and unbearable sounds just as the hammers harden and flatten out over time.
I have played both Steinway grands and M&H grands at my local piano dealer and finally chose my favorite which is the M&H BB 7' grand piano and love it so much that I play it every day.
Steinway and Mason & Hamilin have essentially very similar acoustical strategy. Steinway and Mason & Hamilin as well as the long gone Chickering pianos, were constantly inovating and experimenting with design possibilities (I once owned a Chickering with an extra wide soundboard for example) so it could be said that the American piano manufacturers were most responsible for the increased dynamic range of modern instruments. But now Bechstein has taken the lead in their newest pianos combining all the applicable design possibilities into their most recent instruments .
I suspect there will be a number very delighted pianists this holiday season when they are surprised by a loved one with one of your fine instruments. Best wishes for a great New Year!
You really moved me with the first performance. Just some background; it's 3:00 am where I am, and I'm dealing with something right now. I've heard this piece a million and a half times (and I'm not even a piano player!), but your first performance moved to tears for the first time in a long time. Then the octave you played and what followed it in your second performance at 5:06 just destroyed me. I know you're goal was to test differences between pianos, but this is what I tell myself, my peers, and my students: never forget that every time you play, you could be changing someone's life. No matter what your intention is, when you play, always remember how deeply you might be moving someone. It could be anyone in the audience, be it live or on the internet. Hello from Seattle!
That mason doesnt need reinforcement of the low end to sound that way. Yhr base on my my little 5'8" Model A is astounding, and has the same resonant tone.
Nice to see you on here, Nate. Speaking of pianos, my favorite piano to practice on when I was at CWU or really any piano period was actually on a Mason & Hamlin. It was on the second floor in the first practice room, it just had such a great touch and warmth to the sound. As much as I loved Dr. Pickett's Steinway's, or those in the recital and concert hall, that Mason & Hamlin was just a great piano to play on.
I am so lucky 🍀 to have found a beautiful 1912 mason and Hamlin (unrestored) and it sounds warm and beautiful. Sometimes I have nightmares my house catches fire and I’m trying to drag a grand piano out of the front door !
I was left a, Mason Hamlin Grand Piano that was built in 1912 It was a great piano, I donated to my local Sachem Library, I had it, "Refurbished" I paid $5000.00 for the work that was done. It was, valued at the price of, 2100,00! It sounds fantastic, the pianists who play it" say they, "Love the sound and the action of it! I get to hear it when it's played. I'm very happy I donated it.
I personally prefer the sound of the Steinway. It isn't as warm as the Mason & Hamlin, but the tone, especially the bass, is just incredible, and you can add a lot more expression and interpretations of other pieces on the Steinway.
The sweet Steinway signature sound is unmistakable. But I am not sure if this is a fair comparison, because the M&H was butt against a wall; the sound is mixed.
Very much so. Not only do you have the reinforcement of the low end by being near the wall, but the reflections clutter the sound. This makes the Steinway more delicate and detailed. The mic/camera placement was farther away on the Mason and Hamlin, which again caused it to be more cluttered. Fact is, if they were both in the middle of the room, the playing of the piano may have been more similar.
@@Daveinet Very much so. Not to mention that technically they in general sound very similar in general. most of the differences people actually hear has to do with how the hammers are treated. You can make a steinway or a mason and hamlin super dark or you can make it super bright, warm or cold. Those aspects are mostly how the piano technitian decided to voice the hammers and which hammer manufacturer is being used. Generally what you are looking for is how well the scale is done which is most apparent where the base strings split and change dirrection. For example the steinway O has an an extremely bad system around that part where the tension just drops and the inharmonisity goes way up. Now it isn't as bad as one of the older yamaha grand pianos (Not the case with current gen ones), but it is noticeable to those with a good ear and makes tuning the piano more difficult. Other things include the quality of the actual soundboard itself and how well the crown is setup. Ultimately the important part about a piano is how well it produces sound as the characteristics of the sound and even things like the action can be replaced. With hand built pianos like steinway Mason and Hamlin, or even a shigiru Kawai you are going to get a lot of variance between pianos. You are going to have good and bad pianos coming out of all of these factories. So what is important is comparing each piano as an individual. And remember that sound characteristics like being warm or dark in tone is all adjustable. The main differences you see with this are in general the result of the factory voicing deciding they want a specific sound and do it differently wtih the 2 exceptions being blutner and bosendorfer. Blutner has notes with 4 wires which which are designed to vibrate sympathetically and bosendorfer has the extra base strings that do the same thing that changes the characteristics of the piano's sound. But other than that, its all in the hammers.
The Mason & Hamlin has a richer and more variegated tone in the bass. The treble sounds more alike on the two pianos than the bass does so. The Steinway just does not have that capacity in the bass for the left hand to express itself so nobly and subtly. This makes the Steinway rather bland sounding overall compared to the sonorous yet delicate Mason & Hamlin.
They are really not different. I have played on many mason and hamlins and stienways and steinway generally doesn't project any differently. Actually in the case of their concert pianos especially the line where they decided it was a good idea to lengthen the keys and add an accelerated action that it actually is hard to play loud on that in the concert hall. Problem being that the key itself bends way too much literally capping how loud you can play. Not do remember that is an issue with a specific line of steinways that are not manufactured anymore, but its meerly an example. Most of the steinway stuff is marketing on steinway's part. Most piano technitians will tell you that they really are on the lower end scale of the high quality brands.
Most folks don't know much about Mason and Hamlin, but they in truth have a darker sound but still an American sound. American means explosive when pushed bombastic when pushed. Both Steinway and Mason Hamlin have that nonlinear signature but M&H darker and yes fat. As opposed to the European tradition which yeilds a more linear sound. That means it sounds like the same instrument only louder when pushed. It has to do with sound board thickness and rim wood choice and thickness.
wow.. both performances are great and each instrument had its own unique musical expression.. love both performances, Mr.Robert your piano store is amazing, indeed you are living with the living pianos :)
I think I liked the M and H just a slight bit more than the Steinway. I also think that one piano being against the wall and the other being towards the middle of the room made the comparison more difficult. I'm certain that being up against the wall had and effect on the sound of the M and H.
Robert, thanks for doing something fun by playing two different pianos to show the contrast. Since they weren't professionally mic-ed, my off-the-cuff opinion is the Mason & Hamlin is warm, but the bass sounds muffled/muddy/less precise, yet the Steinway, to me, while clearer, is also more sharp and piercing. Of course, I am biased since I love the sound of Bechsteins and Baldwins. Robert, put that Steinway up against your big Baldwin, and the Baldwin will always win, IMO.
I liked the Steinway the best, it seems to have a more distinctive sound, a clearer sound. I noticed this in the bass clef part in the left hand. The sound would project better especially if playing with an orchestra. As far as the design and look of a grand piano, Steinway pianos are the most elegant with a beautiful stream-line design. The Mason seems a little more boxy, a bulky look as compared to the Steinway.
I generally prefer the Mason & Hamlin sound but as many have pointed out, it’s difficult to make an honest assessment due the location and camera distance. I do find your Steinway performance was more inspiring... I’m curious if the action was also a factor.
Most Steinway’s simply don’t hold a candle to a fine Mason & Hamlin. I have been playing a MH for years and have only been tempted once or twice to trade and that was for an amazing Bosendorfer at Evola in Bloomfield Hills Michigan. It was $225,000 so couldn’t see spending the money. In your comparison the MH was significantly better - no comparison.
It would be so fun to test drive all the concert grands in your store! You must feel like a kid in a candy store. I know I would! Every brand has a tonal quality they are aiming for and are generally known for, but even so, each individual piano has its own character. As you say, not necessarily one better than another, but differences to be appreciated. I agree that different tonal qualities, differences in touch, and different acoustics inspire different performances. This is a fun video. Hope you do more comparisons sometime.
Positioning of the piano, voicing/regulation, playability, and mic placement all have a say in selection. Hard to judge over a smartphone with a headset. I’ve played both of these models, and it comes down to the one you like the best.
I'm watching and listening to this with a small Samsung tablet with a proportionately small speaker and I could still hear the difference in the two pianos and you're playing. I prefer the Steinway.
Wait... the camera moves on its own?? That's hecking cool. Beautifully played btw, I like the 1st one better. IMO it had more "rich and warm" sound. Altough the second time was also magnificent. Cheers from Poland!!
Could you compare a Mason and Hamilin to a Steinway O from the 20's or around that time? They seem similar in tone usually but it might be interesting to hear any difference in the details. Of course the D from the 80's will be brighter and cleaner sounding as the musical tastes of the age change. As classical performance taste gears more to the technical and clean adjectives and less about other parameters it would also be interesting to have a video exploring modern concert instruments. Love all your videos! I just found a great deal on a Mason and Hamilin RA ( no player in it) your video helped me figure out that make when I couldn't find any info on it. Thanks!
really enjoyed the improvising on each piano, giving each it's own performance and setting it apart from all the others. i liked it played on the Steinway cause of it's cleaner and richer sound. on the first one (forgot the name already) it sounded too muffled and i want to use the word muted. but i think any of them would work to perform a piece on, depends on what your looking for.
My conclusion from the comparison is what I expected. The M&H has a more noble sound while the Steinway has a more... just a little more brilliance. The Steinway sound is very recognizable as the piano sound of the professional pianists most recorded overall. The M&H sound, identical to the one of my 1915 AA grand, is for me the most friendly.
Disregarding the performance of each (they were both well done but different), the sound of the pianos was different because the M&H was next to a hard wall and the S was in the center of the room. I generally dislike Steinways, but it sounded better (more balanced highs vs lows) in this environment, probably because it had more space for the lower notes to develop as the upper notes were absorbed by the air in the room.
Of course, a true evaluation can only be done in the showroom, but to me the Steinway has a thinner sound with more clarity in the middle register. The Mason Hamlin has that warmer/thicker sound, which I actually prefer. The Steinway is say Mikhail Pletnev and the Mason & Hamlin is Garrick Ohlsson (who actually likes M&Hs).
I think the Mason and Hamlin was fuller and richer where as you said the Steinway more precise and perhaps a bit more crystalline. I think the base on the M&H was warmer and it was more pleasing to my ears.
I love Mason and Hamlin pianos, but for me in this instance the Steinway took it one step behind it elevated the piece more than the mason and Hamlin but I wouldn’t kick that either of them out of bed. LOL
If that M and H were tuned up (esp, on the low end) and voiced a little, it would be even better. It's a little tubby-sounding on the recording, but that's probably just the recording. I adore M and H Model 50 uprights.
I prefer the Mason and Hamlin. It has a much more mellow and resonant sound than does the Steinway. I have found that Steinways' action takes more effort to play than does the Mason and Hamilin. As far as bass sound, I like the Mason and Hamlin once again. It has a very deep and resonant sound and the harmonics seem to "bloom" more than on the Steinway.
Oh yeah, that Mason bass! I love playing my Mason. The bass rumbles through me even though it is only 5'8". I could swear my teacher's 6'11" Steinway bass doesnt sound as good, at least not to me.
I enjoyed both performances, but frankly, the quality of the recordings wasn't good enough for me to really get a good comparison of the pianos. It sounded like they were simply recorded with a cell phone and, of course, the acoustic environment wasn't the same for each piano. You didn't mention the model of the Mason & Hamlin. It didn't look like the new 9'-4" model CC. Was it the old 9' Mason & Hamlin model that was discontinued?
what a coincidence im playing the chopin prelude for a recital on Wednesday! To be honest after playing on a Steinway I can't go back but I really want a Mason and Hamlin
I wanted a Steinway for years but finally played a good Mason Model A and was hooked. For me, it is a better piano at less than half the price of a comparable Steinway. I bought a 1975 model. I understand production was uneven in that era but I was lucky to find a superb instrument.
I would argue that you should try all of the high end brands. in my opinion and that of most piano technitians steinway is the botton end of the top of the top of the line pianos. I mean they are very good. That is no doubt, but they charge people like they are the best, yet don't play as well or stay in regulation like the others do. I really like the WNG action in the m&h, but there are many good piano brands that have their areas that they do well. Bosendorfer has that power from the extra strings, yamaha has a good balance and really nice all around tone, blutner has that extra little bit going on in the treble with the extra strings. You should go to a few different piano stores and just see which ones you like. There are lots of high end pianos and steinway had done a fantastic job at marketing. But unlike the other brands, they have not improved their design since the 40s. In many aspects they actually have gone backwards in my opinion with blatent design issues that actually harmed the quality and sound of the piano. on some of them you cannot even play the piano loud because they made they keys too long for the accelerated action.
Do Mason & Hamlin pianos tend to stand up to minor fluctuations in humidity and temperature comparatively better than Steinway, Baldwin, etc.? Thank you.
They actually stand up better. They use a WNG action which is fully carbon fiber so the action does not change at all with humidity. Beyond that the rest of the piano is wood and cast iron which will change with humidity and temperature as do all pianos. You generally do not see differences between brands in this aspect at least not at the high end level. Some of the cheap brands do use younger wood which does cause it to behave differently and generally not in the good way. But with the action being carbon fiber that aspect will remain in regulation far longer than any wood part. Not to mention the lighter weight and less bend of the hammer shank will lead to more control when playing as well as higher accuracy with the hammer strike point in the treble area (really doesn't matter in the base).
The M&H is against the wall. Pianos sound different against a wall vs. the middle of a room. What is the definition of a "warm" sound? I know what it is, but I think it should be defined.
I like both, but I like the Mason and Hamlin a little better. There IS a difference in the acoustics because the Mason and Hamlin is closer to the wall.
For comparisons, both pianos should be placed at the same place in the room. Play on the first one, move it and place the second one in the same place of the first. It's the only way for fair comparisons. HM sound more "metallic"...
I think Steinway's marketing makes it difficult to open our ears to other brands. I wouldnt trade my M&H for any Steinway. I enjoy playing a good Steinway, but none of them compare to how my Mason makes me feel physically while playing. That bass just rumbles through me.
Is this sound considered the American Sound to today ? The older M&H had a warmer sound and the base was absolutely beautiful and full and mellow. I find this sound abrasive and edgy and without "Bloom" of sound. However if this is considered the American Sound, it is not what I am looking for....however does M&H build also the old style earlier type of M&H...with that wonderful Base full blown, and just grand a foundation. I remember when your company started building B&H's using the old patterns of bye gone days ... they in my humble opinion as a musician for over 70 years experience is just what I hear. the upper work is just tinny in sound and lack of clear tone definition..
Anyone who ever played on a Estey(that at least wasnt a spinet model) to give me your thoughts? Im currently buying an upright and Im amazed by how good it sounded through my cellphone(Im buying without testing it), but unfortunately thete isnt much information about this brand on Google
Steinway is more focused, bell-like, and generally more beautiful because the nuances of the harmony and melody are delineated more clearly. M &H sounded rustic and smokey (sfocato), but maybe it was just this one piano. Generally, pianos that are not as bright sound less appealing on recordings, so this may also account for the “muddy” impression of this piano.
I'm surprised and very glad to see so many people liking the M&H sound. The Steinway is a much more refined piano out of these two on the floor and it doesn't tire my ears. To each his own. It's like the difference between Pepsi and Coke. The first sip, Pepsi is sweeter, "louder", brighter but from the second sip on you get pretty nauseous. Here comes the 🍅 at me....
Since I’m from Europe I’ve never played a Mason & Hamlin but from this video I must say I almost like it better than Steinway … but I’d have to try it to really know.
Robert, I know this is a tall order, but if your showroom included an audition room with pro recording equipment with anechoic foam at reflection points, I believe your sales through this medium would increase greatly. Piano dollies to easily move the instruments would save your back too. But I must say that the showroom acoustics, and lack of close mic recording greatly limited the tonal quality, hindering the beauty of each instrument you play. But of all your instruments, the Bluthner Model 6 is the most endearing tone I've heard within your showroom.
The Steinway seemed to give more possibility for expression, from translucent softs to clear louds. The M&H had too much of a build sounds for my tastes. I usefully work on a very old Schimmel that has a mellow, not loud sound.
Might be too "modern" for Robert E seeing it was introduced in 2010. It's just not a fat sounding instrument like Steinway and M&H, the sound Robert grew up to love. Would be interesting though. Or, see him next time compare a Sauter and a Shigeru-Kawai, anything but another Steinway. I like Steinway but they're sort of ubiquitous.
The Mason and Hamlin would be definitely better if voiced with a sharper attack, it's a matter of voicing, the sound is richer than a Steinway and I wouldn't know which one to choose, M&H it's also quite rare here in EU and the reputation of Hamburg made Steinways is better than NYCs made so which is the real comparison? I really don't know if this difference between different Steinways really exists.
Steinway is more bright and warm to me and the tone is very even. The Mason and Hamlin remind me of German/European flavor. Very nice but not quite the same even ness…
I really enjoyed the Mason and Hamlin piano better than the Steinway. The Steinway sounded shrill to me. But, who knows, watching multi-thousand dollar pianos on a $200 laptop through $100 headphones. Chances are the pianos sound better in person, lol
I preferred the second one, a little less morose and a little more interesting - i skipped all the talking now i have to go back and find out which is which
It seems to me that the acoustic of that store space is so poor that it is affects negatively the sound of both pianos, especially the Mason and Hamlin, which cannot possibly sound as poor as it does on this video. Mason and Hamlin is too fine a piano really to sound so poor as that.
I preferred the M&H, warmer, less metallic sounding. Although I must also say that the camera is twice as close to the Steinway, therefore the sound is considerably louder. Slightly louder is often perceived to sound better and that has been proved many times in blind listening tests. So lets do this again with the same distance for the microphone, and I think more people will hear the true differences between the two. I generally prefer a warmer sound in my home, because its easier to listen to in smaller rooms.
I think the location of the pianos made a difference as well. While I preferred the M & H it would be interesting to see what it sounded like in the middle of the room as opposed to against the wall.
About smaller rooms.... I have a 1915 M&H model AA and my living room is not exactly small, but the sound of the instrument is so strong that I never play it with the lid raised. I even lower the music stand and close the front cover for even less sound. And then, the music from this instrument is spectacular!
@@Ernesto7608 1915 m&h are very different. Different scale, Carbonfiber wng action in the current m&h which is a massive benefit over wood actions as well as different hammers. Not to mention if your 1915 piano hasn't had ware parts replaced, you can get some really loud and unbearable sounds just as the hammers harden and flatten out over time.
@@zackeryhardy9504 makes me wish I should have played that model CC when I had the chance to🎹🎶
Hey your comment told me everything I needed to know about video with even watching it. Thank your for your conciseness and honesty
I grew up playing a Mason & Hamlin AA, so I'm a little biased! I love the richness and full tone of the Mason.
I’ve had my M&H 45 years and I love it. I knew immediately that you were playing one in your demo. It has a rich, warm, personal sound.
I have played both Steinway grands and M&H grands at my local piano dealer and finally chose my favorite which is the M&H BB 7' grand piano and love it so much that I play it every day.
Steinway and Mason & Hamilin have essentially very similar acoustical strategy. Steinway and Mason & Hamilin as well as the long gone Chickering pianos, were constantly inovating and experimenting with design possibilities (I once owned a Chickering with an extra wide soundboard for example) so it could be said that the American piano manufacturers were most responsible for the increased dynamic range of modern instruments. But now Bechstein has taken the lead in their newest pianos combining all the applicable design possibilities into their most recent instruments .
The melody really seems to pierce through the bass chords a lot nicer on the Steinway. The melody seems muted on the M&H.
I suspect there will be a number very delighted pianists this holiday season when they are surprised by a loved one with one of your fine instruments. Best wishes for a great New Year!
I liked the Mason and Hamlin better. I like a darker sound which the Mason and Hamlin is capable of doing more so than the Steinway.
You really moved me with the first performance. Just some background; it's 3:00 am where I am, and I'm dealing with something right now. I've heard this piece a million and a half times (and I'm not even a piano player!), but your first performance moved to tears for the first time in a long time. Then the octave you played and what followed it in your second performance at 5:06 just destroyed me. I know you're goal was to test differences between pianos, but this is what I tell myself, my peers, and my students: never forget that every time you play, you could be changing someone's life. No matter what your intention is, when you play, always remember how deeply you might be moving someone. It could be anyone in the audience, be it live or on the internet.
Hello from Seattle!
That mason doesnt need reinforcement of the low end to sound that way. Yhr base on my my little 5'8" Model A is astounding, and has the same resonant tone.
Nice to see you on here, Nate. Speaking of pianos, my favorite piano to practice on when I was at CWU or really any piano period was actually on a Mason & Hamlin. It was on the second floor in the first practice room, it just had such a great touch and warmth to the sound. As much as I loved Dr. Pickett's Steinway's, or those in the recital and concert hall, that Mason & Hamlin was just a great piano to play on.
I prefer the performance in Steinway. More expressive.
I am so lucky 🍀 to have found a beautiful 1912 mason and Hamlin (unrestored) and it sounds warm and beautiful.
Sometimes I have nightmares my house catches fire and I’m trying to drag a grand piano out of the front door !
I was left a, Mason Hamlin Grand Piano that was built in 1912 It was a great piano, I donated to my local Sachem Library, I had it, "Refurbished" I paid $5000.00 for the work that was done. It was, valued at the price of, 2100,00! It sounds fantastic, the pianists who play it" say they, "Love the sound and the action of it! I get to hear it when it's played. I'm very happy I donated it.
I would love to visit this showroom! Maybe one day
I personally prefer the sound of the Steinway. It isn't as warm as the Mason & Hamlin, but the tone, especially the bass, is just incredible, and you can add a lot more expression and interpretations of other pieces on the Steinway.
The sweet Steinway signature sound is unmistakable. But I am not sure if this is a fair comparison, because the M&H was butt against a wall; the sound is mixed.
Very much so. Not only do you have the reinforcement of the low end by being near the wall, but the reflections clutter the sound. This makes the Steinway more delicate and detailed. The mic/camera placement was farther away on the Mason and Hamlin, which again caused it to be more cluttered. Fact is, if they were both in the middle of the room, the playing of the piano may have been more similar.
@@Daveinet Very much so. Not to mention that technically they in general sound very similar in general. most of the differences people actually hear has to do with how the hammers are treated. You can make a steinway or a mason and hamlin super dark or you can make it super bright, warm or cold. Those aspects are mostly how the piano technitian decided to voice the hammers and which hammer manufacturer is being used. Generally what you are looking for is how well the scale is done which is most apparent where the base strings split and change dirrection. For example the steinway O has an an extremely bad system around that part where the tension just drops and the inharmonisity goes way up. Now it isn't as bad as one of the older yamaha grand pianos (Not the case with current gen ones), but it is noticeable to those with a good ear and makes tuning the piano more difficult.
Other things include the quality of the actual soundboard itself and how well the crown is setup. Ultimately the important part about a piano is how well it produces sound as the characteristics of the sound and even things like the action can be replaced. With hand built pianos like steinway Mason and Hamlin, or even a shigiru Kawai you are going to get a lot of variance between pianos. You are going to have good and bad pianos coming out of all of these factories. So what is important is comparing each piano as an individual. And remember that sound characteristics like being warm or dark in tone is all adjustable. The main differences you see with this are in general the result of the factory voicing deciding they want a specific sound and do it differently wtih the 2 exceptions being blutner and bosendorfer. Blutner has notes with 4 wires which which are designed to vibrate sympathetically and bosendorfer has the extra base strings that do the same thing that changes the characteristics of the piano's sound. But other than that, its all in the hammers.
The Mason & Hamlin has a richer and more variegated tone in the bass. The treble sounds more alike on the two pianos than the bass does so. The Steinway just does not have that capacity in the bass for the left hand to express itself so nobly and subtly. This makes the Steinway rather bland sounding overall compared to the sonorous yet delicate Mason & Hamlin.
My teacher always said - Steinway resonates better in concert, theater & large rooms. The Mason & Hamlin is perfect for living rooms, homes.
They are really not different. I have played on many mason and hamlins and stienways and steinway generally doesn't project any differently. Actually in the case of their concert pianos especially the line where they decided it was a good idea to lengthen the keys and add an accelerated action that it actually is hard to play loud on that in the concert hall. Problem being that the key itself bends way too much literally capping how loud you can play. Not do remember that is an issue with a specific line of steinways that are not manufactured anymore, but its meerly an example. Most of the steinway stuff is marketing on steinway's part. Most piano technitians will tell you that they really are on the lower end scale of the high quality brands.
Most folks don't know much about Mason and Hamlin, but they in truth have a darker sound but still an American sound. American means explosive when pushed bombastic when pushed. Both Steinway and Mason Hamlin have that nonlinear signature but M&H darker and yes fat. As opposed to the European tradition which yeilds a more linear sound. That means it sounds like the same instrument only louder when pushed. It has to do with sound board thickness and rim wood choice and thickness.
I preferred the Mason. I like the mellower sound
wow.. both performances are great and each instrument had its own unique musical expression.. love both performances, Mr.Robert your piano store is amazing, indeed you are living with the living pianos :)
MH hands down! It is a more full and rounded sound. The S. sounds very nice, but is a sharper and more piercing sound. Both good pianos.
I think I liked the M and H just a slight bit more than the Steinway. I also think that one piano being against the wall and the other being towards the middle of the room made the comparison more difficult. I'm certain that being up against the wall had and effect on the sound of the M and H.
Very true, however I do here that Mason&Hamlins have a strong bass so that's probably one of the factors as well🎹🎶
Robert, thanks for doing something fun by playing two different pianos to show the contrast. Since they weren't professionally mic-ed, my off-the-cuff opinion is the Mason & Hamlin is warm, but the bass sounds muffled/muddy/less precise, yet the Steinway, to me, while clearer, is also more sharp and piercing. Of course, I am biased since I love the sound of Bechsteins and Baldwins. Robert, put that Steinway up against your big Baldwin, and the Baldwin will always win, IMO.
I’d like to hear them next to a Baldwin of a similar vintage
I liked the Steinway the best, it seems to have a more distinctive sound, a clearer sound. I noticed this in the bass clef part in the left hand. The sound would project better especially if playing with an orchestra. As far as the design and look of a grand piano, Steinway pianos are the most elegant with a beautiful stream-line design. The Mason seems a little more boxy, a bulky look as compared to the Steinway.
I generally prefer the Mason & Hamlin sound but as many have pointed out, it’s difficult to make an honest assessment due the location and camera distance. I do find your Steinway performance was more inspiring... I’m curious if the action was also a factor.
Most Steinway’s simply don’t hold a candle to a fine Mason & Hamlin. I have been playing a MH for years and have only been tempted once or twice to trade and that was for an amazing Bosendorfer at Evola in Bloomfield Hills Michigan. It was $225,000 so couldn’t see spending the money. In your comparison the MH was significantly better - no comparison.
I am with you!
IDN if its the wall or what. as usual i feel like steinways bring the magic out and give more options on complex harmonies
It would be so fun to test drive all the concert grands in your store! You must feel like a kid in a candy store. I know I would! Every brand has a tonal quality they are aiming for and are generally known for, but even so, each individual piano has its own character. As you say, not necessarily one better than another, but differences to be appreciated. I agree that different tonal qualities, differences in touch, and different acoustics inspire different performances. This is a fun video. Hope you do more comparisons sometime.
Those final three chords move me to tears. Why? Something. Wow. Fine fine playing.
I like the tonality of the Steinway better. Thank you for the comparison.
As a mixer I use M & H for Sad Songs or slow songs and the Steinway for happy or fast songs
Positioning of the piano, voicing/regulation, playability, and mic placement all have a say in selection. Hard to judge over a smartphone with a headset. I’ve played both of these models, and it comes down to the one you like the best.
What about Yamaha ? A Friend has one in his recording studio & Musicians say they love it ! !
Loved it Robert, thank you!
I'm watching and listening to this with a small Samsung tablet with a proportionately small speaker and I could still hear the difference in the two pianos and you're playing. I prefer the Steinway.
I'm curious as to the year and size of the M + H
Wait... the camera moves on its own?? That's hecking cool. Beautifully played btw, I like the 1st one better. IMO it had more "rich and warm" sound. Altough the second time was also magnificent. Cheers from Poland!!
M&H is my favorite as well. but oh I would own a steinway in a heartbeat if I could
I enjoyed the Mason & Hamlin
You're communicating much nicer with the Steinway.
Wonderful playing! I do prefer the tone of the Steinway :D
Perhaps the Steinway is a better investment.
I prefer the warmth of the Steinway. And the bass is so warm and full.
Correct me if I’m mistaken but I think the room kinda sucks.
Could you compare a Mason and Hamilin to a Steinway O from the 20's or around that time? They seem similar in tone usually but it might be interesting to hear any difference in the details.
Of course the D from the 80's will be brighter and cleaner sounding as the musical tastes of the age change. As classical performance taste gears more to the technical and clean adjectives and less about other parameters it would also be interesting to have a video exploring modern concert instruments. Love all your videos! I just found a great deal on a
Mason and Hamilin RA ( no player in it) your video helped me figure out that make when I couldn't find any info on it. Thanks!
really enjoyed the improvising on each piano, giving each it's own performance and setting it apart from all the others. i liked it played on the Steinway cause of it's cleaner and richer sound. on the first one (forgot the name already) it sounded too muffled and i want to use the word muted. but i think any of them would work to perform a piece on, depends on what your looking for.
I like steinway and bosendorfer. Bechstein is good, too
The first one is a Mason&Hamlin CC🎹🎶
My conclusion from the comparison is what I expected. The M&H has a more noble sound while the Steinway has a more... just a little more brilliance. The Steinway sound is very recognizable as the piano sound of the professional pianists most recorded overall. The M&H sound, identical to the one of my 1915 AA grand, is for me the most friendly.
Disregarding the performance of each (they were both well done but different), the sound of the pianos was different because the M&H was next to a hard wall and the S was in the center of the room.
I generally dislike Steinways, but it sounded better (more balanced highs vs lows) in this environment, probably because it had more space for the lower notes to develop as the upper notes were absorbed by the air in the room.
Of course, a true evaluation can only be done in the showroom, but to me the Steinway has a thinner sound with more clarity in the middle register. The Mason Hamlin has that warmer/thicker sound, which I actually prefer. The Steinway is say Mikhail Pletnev and the Mason & Hamlin is Garrick Ohlsson (who actually likes M&Hs).
I think the Mason and Hamlin was fuller and richer where as you said the Steinway more precise and perhaps a bit more crystalline. I think the base on the M&H was warmer and it was more pleasing to my ears.
Enjoyed the playing!
I love Mason and Hamlin pianos, but for me in this instance the Steinway took it one step behind it elevated the piece more than the mason and Hamlin but I wouldn’t kick that either of them out of bed. LOL
Wow! Not a piano player but the M&H sounds so much more organic and inviting
Based on this performance I would choose the Mason & Hamlin which seems to have a thicker richer sound than the Steinway.
Mason & Hamlin the best!
If that M and H were tuned up (esp, on the low end) and voiced a little, it would be even better. It's a little tubby-sounding on the recording, but that's probably just the recording. I adore M and H Model 50 uprights.
I prefer the Mason and Hamlin. It has a much more mellow and resonant sound than does the Steinway. I have found that Steinways' action takes more effort to play than does the Mason and Hamilin. As far as bass sound, I like the Mason and Hamlin once again. It has a very deep and resonant sound and the harmonics seem to "bloom" more than on the Steinway.
Oh yeah, that Mason bass! I love playing my Mason. The bass rumbles through me even though it is only 5'8". I could swear my teacher's 6'11" Steinway bass doesnt sound as good, at least not to me.
I enjoyed both performances, but frankly, the quality of the recordings wasn't good enough for me to really get a good comparison of the pianos. It sounded like they were simply recorded with a cell phone and, of course, the acoustic environment wasn't the same for each piano.
You didn't mention the model of the Mason & Hamlin. It didn't look like the new 9'-4" model CC. Was it the old 9' Mason & Hamlin model that was discontinued?
I swear this guy is related to Mark Hamill.
what a coincidence im playing the chopin prelude for a recital on Wednesday! To be honest after playing on a Steinway I can't go back but I really want a Mason and Hamlin
I wanted a Steinway for years but finally played a good Mason Model A and was hooked. For me, it is a better piano at less than half the price of a comparable Steinway. I bought a 1975 model. I understand production was uneven in that era but I was lucky to find a superb instrument.
I would argue that you should try all of the high end brands. in my opinion and that of most piano technitians steinway is the botton end of the top of the top of the line pianos. I mean they are very good. That is no doubt, but they charge people like they are the best, yet don't play as well or stay in regulation like the others do. I really like the WNG action in the m&h, but there are many good piano brands that have their areas that they do well. Bosendorfer has that power from the extra strings, yamaha has a good balance and really nice all around tone, blutner has that extra little bit going on in the treble with the extra strings. You should go to a few different piano stores and just see which ones you like. There are lots of high end pianos and steinway had done a fantastic job at marketing. But unlike the other brands, they have not improved their design since the 40s. In many aspects they actually have gone backwards in my opinion with blatent design issues that actually harmed the quality and sound of the piano. on some of them you cannot even play the piano loud because they made they keys too long for the accelerated action.
Do Mason & Hamlin pianos tend to stand up to minor fluctuations in humidity and temperature comparatively better than Steinway, Baldwin, etc.? Thank you.
They actually stand up better. They use a WNG action which is fully carbon fiber so the action does not change at all with humidity. Beyond that the rest of the piano is wood and cast iron which will change with humidity and temperature as do all pianos. You generally do not see differences between brands in this aspect at least not at the high end level. Some of the cheap brands do use younger wood which does cause it to behave differently and generally not in the good way. But with the action being carbon fiber that aspect will remain in regulation far longer than any wood part. Not to mention the lighter weight and less bend of the hammer shank will lead to more control when playing as well as higher accuracy with the hammer strike point in the treble area (really doesn't matter in the base).
The M&H is against the wall. Pianos sound different against a wall vs. the middle of a room. What is the definition of a "warm" sound? I know what it is, but I think it should be defined.
Stein wins awesome store Mr Robert!
Funny, but the acoustic sounded a bit different for the two pianos. So my impression that the Steinway offers more clarity may be misjudged.
I like both, but I like the Mason and Hamlin a little better. There IS a difference in the acoustics because the Mason and Hamlin is closer to the wall.
For comparisons, both pianos should be placed at the same place in the room. Play on the first one, move it and place the second one in the same place of the first. It's the only way for fair comparisons. HM sound more "metallic"...
I was surprised that I enjoyed and preferred the sounds of the Mason & Hamlin.
I think Steinway's marketing makes it difficult to open our ears to other brands. I wouldnt trade my M&H for any Steinway. I enjoy playing a good Steinway, but none of them compare to how my Mason makes me feel physically while playing. That bass just rumbles through me.
Is this sound considered the American Sound to today ? The older M&H had a warmer sound and the base was absolutely beautiful and full and mellow. I find this sound abrasive and edgy and without "Bloom" of sound. However if this is considered the American Sound, it is not what I am looking for....however does M&H build also the old style earlier type of M&H...with that wonderful Base full blown, and just grand a foundation. I remember when your company started building B&H's using the old patterns of bye gone days ... they in my humble opinion as a musician for over 70 years experience is just what I hear. the upper work is just tinny in sound and lack of clear tone definition..
The Steinway treble is brighter than the Mason. But both are good pianos.
Anyone who ever played on a Estey(that at least wasnt a spinet model) to give me your thoughts? Im currently buying an upright and Im amazed by how good it sounded through my cellphone(Im buying without testing it), but unfortunately thete isnt much information about this brand on Google
I enjoy the beefy sound of the M&H. Nothing better! Okay
I want to live there 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Steinway is more focused, bell-like, and generally more beautiful because the nuances of the harmony and melody are delineated more clearly.
M &H sounded rustic and smokey (sfocato), but maybe it was just this one piano. Generally, pianos that are not as bright sound less appealing on recordings, so this may also account for the “muddy” impression of this piano.
I personaly prefe the Mason & Hamlin Piano. Have a better Sound.
I'm surprised and very glad to see so many people liking the M&H sound. The Steinway is a much more refined piano out of these two on the floor and it doesn't tire my ears. To each his own.
It's like the difference between Pepsi and Coke. The first sip, Pepsi is sweeter, "louder", brighter but from the second sip on you get pretty nauseous. Here comes the 🍅 at me....
The M&H has a much deeper, warm, and classic sound. It sounds straight out of a 1930s movie.
Since I’m from Europe I’ve never played a Mason & Hamlin but from this video I must say I almost like it better than Steinway … but I’d have to try it to really know.
The Steinway sounds “thinner”. The MH is more expressive.
Robert, I know this is a tall order, but if your showroom included an audition room with pro recording equipment with anechoic foam at reflection points, I believe your sales through this medium would increase greatly. Piano dollies to easily move the instruments would save your back too. But I must say that the showroom acoustics, and lack of close mic recording greatly limited the tonal quality, hindering the beauty of each instrument you play. But of all your instruments, the Bluthner Model 6 is the most endearing tone I've heard within your showroom.
The Steinway seemed to give more possibility for expression, from translucent softs to clear louds. The M&H had too much of a build sounds for my tastes. I usefully work on a very old Schimmel that has a mellow, not loud sound.
Definitely need some baffles and carpet to tone it all down a bit.
You will appreciate more recent videos like this one: ruclips.net/video/0G5nnp5Fnyo/видео.html
I find Steinways to be better suited for softer sweeter pieces while the Mason holds a slight edge for the more grandiose performances IMO
In all honesty, I cannot tell the difference.
steinway immediately sounds better, no doubt
I want to see you play the Yamaha CFX.
Yeah, and compare that to a tigerskinachord, like a Kimball.
Might be too "modern" for Robert E seeing it was introduced in 2010. It's just not a fat sounding instrument like Steinway and M&H, the sound Robert grew up to love. Would be interesting though. Or, see him next time compare a Sauter and a Shigeru-Kawai, anything but another Steinway. I like Steinway but they're sort of ubiquitous.
The Mason and Hamlin would be definitely better if voiced with a sharper attack, it's a matter of voicing, the sound is richer than a Steinway and I wouldn't know which one to choose, M&H it's also quite rare here in EU and the reputation of Hamburg made Steinways is better than NYCs made so which is the real comparison? I really don't know if this difference between different Steinways really exists.
Badly mic'ed in different positions in an overly live showroom. Who can draw any meaningful conclusion from that?
Steinway is more bright and warm to me and the tone is very even. The Mason and Hamlin remind me of German/European flavor. Very nice but not quite the same even ness…
I really enjoyed the Mason and Hamlin piano better than the Steinway. The Steinway sounded shrill to me. But, who knows, watching multi-thousand dollar pianos on a $200 laptop through $100 headphones. Chances are the pianos sound better in person, lol
I prefer the performance on the Steinway. The Mason and Hamlin sounded darker to me.
I prefer the steinway but both were excellent
Der Mason & Hamlin ist der absolute Oberhammer. Da kommt kein Steinway, zumindest für meine Ohren und für mein Empfinden, mit !!
The Steinway sounds a little nasal to me
Recording can be improved - not able to judge between the two.
Prefer the M&H, although the Steinway does sound great.
Steinway sounds better between the two. M&H has too many overtones.
The overtones in the M and H are not good. Neither are particularly stunning but what the M and H has in warmth the Steinway has in clarity.
Mason & Hamlin needs tuning. Unisons are beating. This distraction immediately terminated listening.
I preferred the second one, a little less morose and a little more interesting - i skipped all the talking now i have to go back and find out which is which
It seems to me that the acoustic of that store space is so poor that it is affects negatively the sound of both pianos, especially the Mason and Hamlin, which cannot possibly sound as poor as it does on this video. Mason and Hamlin is too fine a piano really to sound so poor as that.
Mason has it ,
the mason&hamlin doesn't sound very much in tone