Dear Friends,  The thread concerning the dumbed down Weber pianos has
been bothering me since it first appeared here.  There have been few
responses, and I'd like to add a little to it.

My Weber Duo-Art grand is the 5'9".  The serial #79633 dates it to
1927.  It was in excellent unrestored condition, and had never been
abused when I got it three years ago.  I did a lot of research before
getting a reproducing piano, but I also wanted a good piano to practice
and perform on.  What really impressed me the most before even seeing
any pianos was Art Reblitz notes on Aeolian pianos: "everything in the
pianos are of the highest quality of workmanship and materials" (quoted
from memory, may not be exact).

The Weber sounded great when I got it.  After Craig Brougher did an
excellent restoration on the player and the piano action, it sounds and
feels fantastic!  Personally, I don't think it's dumbed down at all.

Different from a 1920s Steinway?  Yes.  Inferior?  No!  The action is
quick and responsive, the touch is fantastic.  The sound is sweet in
the treble and powerful in the bass.  I've been playing piano since I
was seven years old and have played many pianos in last 33 years.  This
Weber is one of the best.  My experience has not, however, allowed me
to experience a pre-WW1 Weber, which I would love to try, to see and
hear what the difference is.  I cannot imagine that it could be that
much better than my own piano.

On a side note, my Weber contained some interesting riddles.  Along
with Craig, we suspect that this piano may have been actually
manufactured much earlier than 1927 and sat in a warehouse until
needed.

There are "ghosts" of other player components under the key bed, and
screw holes for nothing.  The tracker bar has the later style inner
tracker ears and an 80 note stack.  Craig said that it is possible that
Aeolian fitted this piano out as a Duo-Art in the early 1920s and
warehoused it.  When they brought it out for sale in 1927, they took
out the earlier player components and "modernized" it with up-to-date
pieces to make it look brand new.  Keep in mind we don't know this for
sure, but it does make sense.  The first owners also burned coal --
because the action stack was filled with coal dust!

When I purchased the piano, I got it from the second owner, a man who
told me his father bought the piano for him to play on in the early
1950s.  By then the player part did not work, and never interested him
as they bought it as a straight piano only.  He also told me his piano
tuner recommended gutting the player "stuff" because it "was just in
the way, anyhow".  Fortunately, they never got around to it!

When I took the stack down for Craig to look at, I was hoping we could
avoid replacing the valves, because I knew that Aeolian was notorious
for the use of excellent leathers.  Craig popped out a valve and said,
"See, it looks great!  But watch this."  He took a small nail and
scratched the surface of the valve a little and it disintegrated,
proving, right in front of me that the leather must be replaced.  The
proof was in my hand.  Even if it looks good, it must be replaced!

Craig completed a full restoration, including new hammers and voicing.
It couldn't be better!

In conclusion, my observations and opinions are entirely my own.  It
may be that some later Weber grands were inferior to their previous
output, but I think Aeolian got the last laugh if there is one.  They
may have changed the Weber's look to satisfy the contract with
Steinway, but I don't think they lowered the quality much, if at all.
The opinions of other Weber owners, and technicians who have worked on
them would be very interesting to me.  Let's keep this thread going a
little longer, please.

Rob Case
Stevens Point, Wisconsin