> THIS MESSAGE IS IN MIME FORMAT. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment See the article "Replacing Steinway Parts" by Robert Cloutier in the January 2000 issue of Piano and Keyboard Magazine. This article is written to explain the history of Steinway action parts over the last 40 years. It is a well written, coherent article, written to be understood by the pianist. It makes it clear that if the piano is to play optimally, we must use the parts that work optimally. Ed Sutton ---------- From: "Lorlin D. Barber" <ldb@commonlink.com> To: "caut@ptg.org" <caut@ptg.org> Subject: Steinway parts vs. Renner argument Date: Thu, Sep 21, 2000, 7:01 PM After five years of successfully rebuilding S&S actions with Renner action parts and Renner and Abel hammers, the new departmental dictum is "nothing but Steinway parts in the Steinways". I've been informed that a Steinway action part is subcontracted out to the lowest bidder (which may even be Renner). If this is true it debunks the idea that what comes from Steinway is made by Steinway. Does anyone know of any printed articles that defend the use of Renner action parts over Steinway that may help sway such an opinion? Many thanks! Lorlin Barber -- Barbers Piano Service, Inc. Phone No. 515-274-5940 Website: http://www.barberspiano.com ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/caut.php/attachments/01/23/1d/10/attachment.htm ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC