Guidelines comments

[Otto Keyes]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
Sounds like an education problem in the hallowed halls of higher learning.  Even bean counters can hear the difference between a Horowitz recording played on a worn-out Radio Shack cassette deck and a top of the line CD player.  While we may abhor the stereotype, reality often finds much more open, and aethsetically atuned, minds.  Part of your job is to "awaken the latent artist" [ :-) ] in your faculty and music dept. admin.  An enlightened and enthusiastic faculty will sell the concept of good piano maintenance if they really desire a cutting edge music program.  If they don't care, or have given up, or if you evaluate pianos as so many beans in a bag, you've got a real problem.  

If we merely appeal to the "bean counter's bottom line", then we've lost sight of the art.  We just as well go mow the lawn....but when you think about it, that has no real, productive purpose either......think I'll sell the lawn mower.

Otto
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Wimblees@aol.com 
  To: caut@ptg.org 
  Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 1:57 PM
  Subject: Re: Guidelines comments


  In a message dated 6/12/03 12:35:22 PM Central Daylight Time, fssturm@unm.edu writes:


    I don't know, Wim. I can't see how we can argue that a piano _lasts_ longer 
    if we do the recommended maintenance as you describe. In fact, it seems to 
    me that doing what we recommend costs more and makes pianos last less long 
    - or at least makes the components of pianos last less long. Regular hammer 
    filing makes hammers die quicker; repinning shanks to maintain frictional 
    parameters means more rapid replacement of shanks and flanges; regular 
    re-stringing means more rapid replacement of pinblock; etc.
      Now there are schools where quality rebuilding and maintenance isn't part 
    of the picture, and where, particularly with regard to performance pianos, 
    there is a tendency to replace more often than necessary. The hammers get 
    beaten in, some zings appear, key bushings get sloppy, knuckles and tails 
    are glazed - the piano just isn't that wonderful instrument they picked out 
    so carefully. Better get a new one. I've seen that often enough, and I 
    expect many others have as well. It means piles of money goes to replacing 
    prominent pianos, leaving next to nothing for maintenance and replacement 
    of the rest of the inventory.
      In that kind of circumstance, you can certainly argue that hiring a 
    qualified tech would save you money. But for the most part, I think the 
    only argument that makes sense is that you have to invest in maintenance by 
    a skilled tech if you want to have instruments at a quality level adequate 
    to higher education needs. Period. Keeping pianos a performance level 
    requires a constant investment of time and skill.
    Regards,
    Fred Sturm
    Universidad de Nuevo Mexico



  Unfortunately, trying to convince bean counters that the school needs to spend money on piano tuners is going to fall on deaf ears, if we can't show them it is going to save them money. Just telling an administrator that WE say one full time piano tuner is needed for 70 - 100 pianos, because WE say what needs to be done to keep piano working the way WE say they should work, is just not going to cut it. I think we have to show, with actual case studies, that investing in a piano tuner is going to save them money in the long run. We have to show, in writing, with examples, that, to paraphrase the Fram Oil Filter commercial "you need to pay a piano tuner now, or you will have to buy new pianos sooner." 

  If we can show that a qualified piano tuner can postpone the purchase of new pianos by 20 or even 40 years, they might listen. But just telling them that investing in a piano tuner is going to make the pianos play and sound better, only a few piano professors are going to agree with you. But the bean counter, and maybe even the rest of the department, is going to say, so what, I'd rather have the money for scholarships, or some new music, or a new desk in my office.  

  The new Guidelines are very good, and helpful, and hopefully it will give a few department chairs the ammunition they need to get a qualified piano tuner. I'm trying to suggest a few ways to make the guidelines even better. It will require some more work on our part. But we've gone this far, so why not go the extra mile, and make it even better?

  Wim 

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/caut.php/attachments/c4/f2/48/3e/attachment.htm

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--