Rail Cloth

[Serge Harel]

> Date:          Sun, 30 Apr 1995 14:20:11 -0600 (MDT)
> From:          mckonejw@skypoint.com (John W. McKone)
> Subject:       Re: Rail Cloth
> To:            Multiple recipients of list <pianotech@byu.edu>
> Reply-to:      pianotech@byu.edu

> John Musselwhite wrote:
> >
> >The reason I put it there is because the factory specs call for it to be
> >there. Normally I don't take all the hammers off at once anyway, so I just
> >leave the original cloth if it and the rail in good shape.
> >
> >When I service a Steinway for a customer one of the ways I sell a major job
> >is by emphasising the use of Steinway parts and techniques. While other
> >parts may be more suitable either for technical or personal preference many
> >of my customers have insisted on "original equipment parts" and sometimes
> >even want the end-flaps off the new cartons and samples of the original parts.
> >
> >While replacing the damper back-action, hammers etc. with Renners may be
> >practical, I've run into more than a few owners to whom NY factory parts are
> >what makes it a "Steinway".
> >
> >                John
> >
> >John Musselwhite, RPT               Calgary, Alberta Canada
> >musselj@cadvision.com       john.musselwhite@67.cambo.cuug.ab.ca
>
> I would submit that if our mission is to rebuild a piano to "steinway
> specs", then using Steinway parts is not always the best way to do so.
>
> I have always found Renner parts to have a quality control far beyond
> anything S&S has been able to provide.
>
> I too have clients that want the "Genuine Steinway" box.  I try to convince
> them (often quite succesfully) that what I hear them telling me is that
> they want the piano to feel and sound like a Steinway, and the best way for
> me to provide that for them in a rebuild is to use the highest quality
> parts available.
>
> Just because it has the name on the box, doesn't mean it does the job.
>
> John McKone
>
>
>
>