The Blüthner was shrill in the upper registers and wasn't quite in tune - just a bit flat. It was very obvious that it was not tuned using the tuner's discriminating ear in the last few measures when a first and a third were played together by the right hand. It sounded like it was tuned using an electrical tuning machine and not adjusted in the thirds and fifths. The bass had little presence - it was just a low note. The Bösendorfer was just a bit out of tune in the upper registers but not nearly as bad as the Blüthner. The Bösendorfer's upper notes were almost bell-like and not uncomfortably shrill. The bass had a nice resonant presence. The first and third notes near the end matched the mood of the piece - somber but in tune and not jangly. The Blüthner was 6'3". The Bösendorfer was 6'7" so size alone shouldn't make much difference. The quality and resonance of the sound board has to be the deciding factor in choosing which piano to purchase. It appeared that the mics were placed in just about the same place on each piano. The Bösendorfer would get my vote for the better sounding piano in this "contest." I would have liked to hear a piece that could have pressed the acoustics and resonance of the sound board as well as the lower end to their limits - a piece that was very difficult. Moving the mics off of the sound board and further out to where the "audience" would be would have displayed each piano's sound better.
The Bösendorfer is masculine and the Blüthner is feminine. The Bösendorfer demands effort from the pianist to produce that rich sound, whereas the Blüthner takes a delicate, strategic and almost surgical touch from the pianist. The beauty from each instrument depends on whether or not the pianist has an understanding of the weight of the keys and can maximize the sound accordingly.
I keep listening to various recordings with Blüthner and I still can't fathom why so many people praise it so much. I've tried some pianos in Leipzig, I didn't like the sound and I still don't. Sharp, shrill, unpleasant to the ear. I'm not saying they're bad pianos, of course. (Today I had to practice on an Essex, speaking of bad pianos...) But there's always something off.
Prep is important, and not everyone knows what to aim for with the voicing. On a good day, I would say that a Bluthner is a string instrument, not brass or percussion. It was Debussy's favorite, and he knew what he wanted with color. That said, this Bosendorfer sounds really lovely.
The Bösendorfer has a clean, sharp elegance. The Blüthner oozes character. I always loved the sound of a well prepared Bösendorfer over Steinways and Bechsteins, but Blüthner always were so different that I felt I could not compare them properly. I was looking for a good grand, 200-230 cm long some time ago and of course played Bösendorfee 200 and 225 instruments which were wonderful but of course really expensive (45-80000€). Then I found a Blüthner X (230cm) from 1908 with a double repetition action and fell in love for a third of what a Bösendorfer 225 would have been. Now I have this characteristic sound in my living room. Sometimes I wonder if a Bösendorfer 225 would be nicer. Then I stop, call myself an idiot and remind myself that I do own one of the finest pianos. The grass is always greener on the other side and as long as two grands in my living room is not an option, I shall be happy and excited.
all top brands sound very good. the choice is personal preference.
schön!
Great !
Bösendorfer sounds clearer, more accurate and overall creates a calmer fealling. For those reasons is my preference.
🤗🎼🎶Bluthner has a more soothing sound ,on the hand Bosendorfer has brilliant sound 👍👍🤗🎼🎶🎵🚴♀️🚲🚴🏼♀️
Bluthner - more fragility, glass like, femininity
On a first hearing I preferred the Boesendorfer - but on a second hearing the Bluethner appealed much more. Strange.
The Blüthner was shrill in the upper registers and wasn't quite in tune - just a bit flat. It was very obvious that it was not tuned using the tuner's discriminating ear in the last few measures when a first and a third were played together by the right hand. It sounded like it was tuned using an electrical tuning machine and not adjusted in the thirds and fifths. The bass had little presence - it was just a low note.
The Bösendorfer was just a bit out of tune in the upper registers but not nearly as bad as the Blüthner. The Bösendorfer's upper notes were almost bell-like and not uncomfortably shrill. The bass had a nice resonant presence. The first and third notes near the end matched the mood of the piece - somber but in tune and not jangly.
The Blüthner was 6'3". The Bösendorfer was 6'7" so size alone shouldn't make much difference. The quality and resonance of the sound board has to be the deciding factor in choosing which piano to purchase. It appeared that the mics were placed in just about the same place on each piano. The Bösendorfer would get my vote for the better sounding piano in this "contest." I would have liked to hear a piece that could have pressed the acoustics and resonance of the sound board as well as the lower end to their limits - a piece that was very difficult. Moving the mics off of the sound board and further out to where the "audience" would be would have displayed each piano's sound better.
The Bösendorfer is masculine and the Blüthner is feminine. The Bösendorfer demands effort from the pianist to produce that rich sound, whereas the Blüthner takes a delicate, strategic and almost surgical touch from the pianist. The beauty from each instrument depends on whether or not the pianist has an understanding of the weight of the keys and can maximize the sound accordingly.
That G#3 of Bluethener sounds off.
I keep listening to various recordings with Blüthner and I still can't fathom why so many people praise it so much. I've tried some pianos in Leipzig, I didn't like the sound and I still don't. Sharp, shrill, unpleasant to the ear. I'm not saying they're bad pianos, of course. (Today I had to practice on an Essex, speaking of bad pianos...) But there's always something off.
Prep is important, and not everyone knows what to aim for with the voicing. On a good day, I would say that a Bluthner is a string instrument, not brass or percussion. It was Debussy's favorite, and he knew what he wanted with color.
That said, this Bosendorfer sounds really lovely.
Would you try a Bechstein vs Steinway with The Claire De lune piece?🤗🤗🎼🎶🎵🚴♀️🚲🚴🏼♀️🚲
Bosendorfer for me .
Bosendorfer
which do you like more? please comment...
Bos
I prefer the Rivella.
Bosendorfer sounds better, but I liked Blunther better.
Good answer :-)
0:00
0:13
4:21
4:34
The Bösendorfer has a clean, sharp elegance. The Blüthner oozes character.
I always loved the sound of a well prepared Bösendorfer over Steinways and Bechsteins, but Blüthner always were so different that I felt I could not compare them properly.
I was looking for a good grand, 200-230 cm long some time ago and of course played Bösendorfee 200 and 225 instruments which were wonderful but of course really expensive (45-80000€). Then I found a Blüthner X (230cm) from 1908 with a double repetition action and fell in love for a third of what a Bösendorfer 225 would have been.
Now I have this characteristic sound in my living room. Sometimes I wonder if a Bösendorfer 225 would be nicer. Then I stop, call myself an idiot and remind myself that I do own one of the finest pianos. The grass is always greener on the other side and as long as two grands in my living room is not an option, I shall be happy and excited.
Hard to admit but the Bösendorfer outperforms the Blüthner. And I love Blüthner.
Bosendorfer is much better!!
bluthner lacks inharmonicity ngl
Bosendorfer