Yesterday I found the following journal article published in December 29th, 1906 by The Music Trade Review (MTR):
"Never before has dignified advertising played such a prominent role in the marketing of the piano and in this the year of 1906 must be set down as unique.
There has perhaps never been a more satisfactory tour than the one which was closed on Thursday when Saint-Saëns, the most distinguished composer of the day, left for his home in Paris. This tour was only one of the gigantic strides made by Wm. Knabe & Co., and will go far toward the artistic exploitation of a piano which is able to stand upon its own merits and to substantiate the most extravagant statements that can be made in its behalf. The letter of Dr. Saint-Saëns is one of those rare tributes to the Knabe piano which is priceless because it carries the true expression not only of one who understands every grade and quality of tone, but whose entire life has been one of frankness and sincerity almost to the point of rudeness."
Camille Saint-Saëns, born in Paris on October 9, 1835, was a musical prodigy who gave a public performance when he was only five years of age. He is best remembered for his musical suite The Carnival of the Animals (Le Carnaval des Animaux).
Coincidentally, Saint-Saëns visited the United States for the first time in 1906. The article above implies that Saint-Saëns, even then a greatly respected and discerning European composer and pianist, gave a recommendation letter to Wm. Knabe & Co.
Yet in 1908, just two years after the article's publication, Wm. Knabe & Co. and Chickering & Sons were dissolved and incorporated into American Piano Co., marking the demise of these venerated century-old piano makers. Perhaps the general taste of music and the status of piano were changing; however, I wonder how the demise occurred in such a short span of time.
The article's extravagant language is quite amusing. It somehow reminds me of the Hindenburg disaster broadcast.
Reference: Edward Lyman Bill, "In the Musical World." The Music Trade Review 43.26 (1906): 16