This brings up an interesting question: if Steinway were liquidated, would the patents be up for sale?
It is my understanding that much of their unique quality comes from over 100 patents, many of which are over 100 years old [1].
Presumably a competitor could buy the patents and make significant improvements to their design.
Part of the Steinway brand is built on tremendous marketing savvy, generation after generation. But the technology remains unparalleled. As a professional pianist, I wouldn't use anything else for a recording.
Don't get me wrong, I would love for Yamaha, Fazioli or the others to make the market more competitive. But nothing compares to a Steinway in terms of sound quality and balance throughout the registers.
All the first-class piano technicians I know agree.
Edit: IvyMike and ryanhuff brought my attention to the 20 year maximum term of patent. It is surprising that Steinway's competitors still are unable to match the quality of sound. Perhaps their technicians are better?
> Edit: IvyMike and ryanhuff brought my attention to the 20 year maximum term of patent. It is surprising that Steinway's competitors still are unable to match the quality of sound.
Not necessarily. Patents only need to describe enough to be enforceable, they don't have to include any of the subtle details which are necessary to make things tick. A famous example of this was all the patents filed by the famous German pharmaceutical & chemical giants in the USA to protect their cutting-edge processes: the patents worked very well to protect their IP, and then WWI came and the salivating competitors got the German patents seized - and couldn't figure out how to do the things, because the patents had left out critical details.
The damage has been done. The major labels (major now only in terms of increasingly dubious marketing clout) now spend most of their 'creative' energy scouting do-it-yourself musicians rather than producing great music...which was, initially, what distinguished them from the little guys.
This leveling of the playing field was supposed to be a great thing for everyone except the majors.
But as a listener, I bemoan that the output quality of the majors has dropped so much (especially in classical music). In order to get access to first class, interesting music, it is becoming increasingly necessary to do tons of research.
The bigger picture is this: would you invest in a business that celebrated not losing revenue for the first time in over a decade? I wouldn't.
In my experience it is highly impractical to expect someone to try anything for 70 minutes before deciding if they like it. Some kind of step-wise introduction is more helpful.
It's not easy with Feldman, but I am convinced it is possible.
Here is a 2 minute excerpt of "Palais de Mari" from 1986 (for solo piano) that may help people decide whether they want to hear more: http://ivancdg.com/music/1.mp3
People have told me that this reminds them of Debussy (the Prélude "Footprints in the Snow", specifically).
Morton Feldman (1926-1987) was convinced that he was a major 20th century composer. That point of view put him in the minority. Now, 26 years after his untimely death, people are starting to agree. Classical music-lovers, numb from all of the brutal, post-war contemporary music, are intrigued by this unusually intuitive composer and his tender, obsessive music.
Feldman's "late" works are the most remarkable. Often spanning hours in length, he transformed the concert into a ritual. "Is music an art form?" he liked to ask. In other words, is music more than just entertainment? His answer was clearly: "Yes".
Feldman's works are not just listened to, they are experienced. They are a mixture of music, performance art, and philosophy. Unlike John Cage, his close friend and mentor, Feldman was not interested in Zen philosophy. But listening to Feldman’s music leads to a heightened state of mind, a kind of musical enlightenment.
I just recorded two of Feldman's greatest works for solo piano: "Palais de Mari" (1986, 23') and "For Bunita Marcus" (1985, 67'). 15 minutes ago, I would've put the probability of seeing an article about Feldman on Hacker News at zero. Bravo.
Feldman's "Rothko Chapel" is a great way to get into his music (written following the suicide of painter Mark Rothko).
> Morton Feldman (1926-1987) was convinced that he was a major 20th century composer. That point of view put him in the minority. Now, 26 years after his untimely death, people are starting to agree.
It's Béla Bartók all over again. I wonder if there's an unwritten rule in nature that truly creative composers have to die before people recognize the value of their work?
A counterexample to this pattern is Philip Glass, who is receiving some recognition, but by virtue of being recognized in his own lifetime, may undercut his own reputation.
I suspect that the high concept musicians of our era will not be the ones that are remembered. John Williams or (shudder) Andrew Lloyd Weber perhaps will, and they dodn't need to die to receive recognition. Those unacknowledged geniuses composing difficult music will be obscure footnotes.
It launched on HN a little over 2 months ago and garnered considerable interest: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6226607