theRe: need more info in the journal

[David Love]

I don't think the comments on journal content were directed at anyone
personally.  I think it's perfectly reasonable to issue comments designed to
improve the journal's format and content.  Those issuing comments are,
afterall, the subscribers and readers and I would think that this type of
criticism would be useful.

That being said, I would also like to see more articles in each journal, but
I have no idea what kind of pool the editors have to draw from.  If more
technicians would spend some time sharing their ideas and expertise in
different areas, perhaps the editorial staff would be in a better position
to make long term decisions about the volume of material they can include in
each issue.  Periodic polls on readership interest have been conducted and I
would think the editors must have a fairly good idea about what people would
like to see.  I personally would like to see the journal divided into
various main areas: tuning, voicing, regulating, repairs, design and
construction, etc..   One longer article per issue in each category per
issue, and a shorter article in each of the others.  The longer articles
could rotate around the categories.  For example, I would have liked to have
seen Del Fandrich's article on restoring crown in soundboards in full in
this issue.  Next issue perhaps an article on comparative voicing techniques
between hammers (maybe that's too much for one issue), etc..

I also think that using the list as a source for material has been good and
I would like to see more use of the so called "round table discussions".  I
realize the editing is difficult and time consuming, but I think it can be a
good source of information and make for interesting reading.

But to reiterate, the journal's ability to produce a larger issue will
depend a lot on the amount of quality material they have at their disposal.
Those who want to see more might think about contributing more and/or
encouraging those with something to offer to do the same.

David Love

 ----- Original Message -----
From: <kam544@flash.net>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: June 09, 2002 7:28 AM
Subject: Re: theRe: need more info in the journal


>...a big reason reason I
>stay in PTG and pay the dues (only $55 of which, admittedly, is for the
>Journal) is for the ongoing information -- hopefully mostly technical -- in
>the Journal every month...
>         --David Nereson, RPT, Denver

Dave, Nereson,

Of course being a Registered Piano Technician in the Piano
Technicians Guild and the associational recognition that comes with
it doesn't have much to do with you staying a member, neh?

I would rebuff the content claims you have made comparing the early
80s' with current times. Sounds like the old typewriter to the
computer mentality philosophy.

It's a newer age, and with that come newer ways of doing things that
become blended in with the old, and/or even end up completely
replacing the old. It's nothing more than just another journey
through the desert.

I applaud the current PT Journal folks for a fantastic job in their
publishing efforts! It's way out of my realm to consider the task of
doing such a thing.

Anyone who doesn't think the personal currently in charge don't
measure up, step up to the plate and show us the money.

Those are my early Sunday morning observations on the subject.

Cordially,

Keith McGavern
Registered Piano Technician
Oklahoma Chapter 731
Piano Technicians Guild
USA
http://www.highpointpiano.com/ptg/conv/chicago2002/