The wood vs. composite debate is a long-standing point of discussion within the piano industry, and no other issue is more polluted with irrational, emotional arguments than this one. By and large, two companies have been responsible for the majority of sentiment that currently exists towards composites: Steinway and Kawai. Ironically, these two companies are close partners on the successful Boston line of pianos. It has long been known, and widely (if not quietly) begrudged by the manufacturing and technical community, that wood actions in North America are problematic. The wide variance in both temperature and humidity make it very difficult to keep a wood action feeling consistent and fluid year-round; this being because wood is by its nature highly reactive to both temperature and humidity. In an effort to begin a next wave of innovation at Steinway in the 1960’s, a time in which American piano building was coming under serious pressure from Asian imports, the concept of a synthetic bushing was proposed, developed, and deployed on Steinway’s lineup of grand pianos. The concept was that if you could tackle the issue of sticky or loose pivot points (depending on the humidity level) by installing a climatically neutral synthetic bushing (Teflon), the piano would finally be a true ‘all-season’ instrument for the North American market.
Having rushed the design to market, very little was known about the bushing’s long-term durability, and sure enough, Steinway’s Teflon bushings began to loosten around the centerpins (like a tiny hinge) resulting in a very audible ‘click’ every time a key was played. Even though the concept had been sound, the fact that the world’s most venerable piano brand – on its first outing with synthetic material – had failed so miserably, quickly translated into an industry-wide backlash against composite materials. In fact, the whole notion of trying to push piano design forward, out of it’s 1920’s paradigm, became a hot potato. For the time, everyone was back to wood.
Kawai, on the other hand, immersed in Japan’s explosive industrial growth and technological dominance of the 1970’s, was actively thinking about how to introduce many new composites and plastics into their pianos to better weather the heavy institutional use that their pianos were receiving. After several years of testing and millions of dollars in investment, Kawai’s first ABS action was released. It was a technical success, but in the North American market, a brutal public relations failure. Many dealers, with Steinway’s Teflon debacle still fresh in their minds, were already equipped with an arsenal of anti-composite selling tools and techniques, and swiftly labeled Kawai’s new piano lines as ‘cheap’ and ‘plastic’. For a time, even the technician community was highly skeptical. However, over the next 20 years, one customer at a time (and certainly aided by the overwhelming adoption of composites in nearly every other consumer industry), Kawai continued to champion and refine their (in)famous composite action.
Composite actions or partial-composite actions are now produced and sold by a large and growing list of highly respected manufacturers, including Yamaha, Kawai, and Mason & Hamlin.
Our Take
We have been, and will continue to be, huge fans of Kawai’s actions, and Mason & Hamlin’s WNG all-carbon actions are simply astounding to play on. However, Grotrian – a small but quite possibly the most respected artisan piano builder in Germany – does not use composite, and their pianos feel amazing; Perzina’s upright line of pianos – for many years Larry Fine’s favorite of the Euro-Asian hybrid pianos – doesn’t use composite, either; and the list goes on. Our position on composite materials, and actions specifically, has always been this:
[checklist]- They provide a clear benefit when it comes to mechanical stability – particularly in situations where climate is difficult to regulate
- They do not sound better or worse than wood actions; in fact, they have no impact on tone whatsoever
- They may last longer than some lower or medium quality wood actions
- In certain situations, they may react and repeat slightly faster than an equivalent quality wood action
- There is no observed benefit or risk to resale value
- In the case of Mason & Hamlin’s action, there does seem to be a higher degree of personalization available vs. a wood action
- If it’s good enough for your golf clubs, hockey sticks, race cars, and passenger jets, it’s probably good enough for a piano, if you want it
The bottom line is: the benefits of a composite action aren’t any more extreme than the original intent, which is to create an action which stands up to a North American climate better than a traditional wood action. Is it possible to maintain a wood action with a little more work and money? Absolutely. Will you save money over the long run with a composite action? Absolutely. Should it be the only reason you either buy or don’t buy a piano? Absolutely not.
