Hi Fred and all others, comments below I agree. I certainly don't endorse an all-Anything for everybody. I guess I don't see that happening in a practical sense - the entire country being "taken over" by all-Steinway. In any case, I hate to see us as cauts getting into battle array to try to stem the tide of those horrible Steinways. It just doesn't make sense to me as an attitude for us to take. By all means, let us do our best to promote the idea of diversity, and try to make that a practical reality where feasible. But I think that we cause ourselves and our profession harm by engaging in this kind of negative campaigning. Regards, Fred Sturm While I myself share opinions that go along the lines of encouraging diversity, I find the whole issue quite a bit more complicated then the 4 points thread offered by Fred earlier and followed up by several others. First off, Steinways are not horrible. They are fine instruments that have their own characteristics. If we as technicians are to simply encourage our employers to focus on our technical skills then we have no business condemning any such instrument. Indeed, an instrument type need be truly unmitigated trash to be ruled out from a technical point of view. The 4 points raised earlier are most certainly points I would not support in any discussion I were to be included in regarding Conservatory purchasing. Not because I agree with them or not, but because those kinds of issues are simply none of my business. I have been and am at present involved in this kind of discussion at one of my work places. My position is strictly to deal with whether or not I can service these to the faculties satisfaction or not. And there is simply no question as to that. They are fine instruments to work with. I would say the same about any decent quality instrument. If pressed on other issues, and I am indeed pressed to give an opinion that is based on the insight my technical life gives me to the business at large, I underline first and formost that all such issues are in the end the faculties responsibility to take decisions on, not mine. Then I give them what I know about the business at large with all the pros and cons as I can see. This gives rise to an entirely different set of points to raise for them. One important pro and con I always underline is that on the one hand the name Steinway IS attached in the world at large to a stamp of Quality. It makes little difference really whether that is deserved or not. The all Steinway stamp DOES attract attention from serious minded pianists both students and faculty alike. On the other hand, any decision to go with an all-anything solution limits diversity... which, along with all ITS ramifications should be considered. I could go on with a several more pros and cons examples... but my point is made I think. Our "job" in such situations is simply to provide technical assurance that any instrument being considered is serviceable or not. It is not our "job" in any sense of the word to try to influence one way OR the other what our schools decide to purchase beyond that single point. If pressed for a statement of opinion on all these other issues, we should simply provide as balanced and as varied a set of pros and cons about any given type of purchasing approach as our insight into this world of pianos allows us.... and no more. While I am personally a fan of diversity.... I am completely against forwarding my own personal agenda.... or anyones. In the end, its the administration and teachers who have to decide what is all in all best for the school, and there is a lot more involved then just whether a piano is usable or not.... tho to be sure that has to be a part of any bottom line. Cheers RicB
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC