Fwd: Mona Lisa Effect

[Ric Brekne]

I must disagree on each of the actual points made below. That there are 
many in the tech and non tech world that buy into marketing pitches made 
by any manufacturer goes without question.  Is Steinway to be singled 
out here ?? I think not.  Mason and Hamlin, Bosendorfer, Bechstein, 
Bluthner, etc etc etc.. all have/had their pitches. Why the fanatic need 
to place Steinway on some special podium ?  Each of these manufacturers 
have also experienced their <<Teflon bushings>> problems as well... and 
need I remind anyone that even Del Fandrich goes good for the basic idea 
of the teflon bushing... citing that it was lack of information as to 
correct maintainance proceedures that was the real problem.  Things that 
are truely bad get changed because they die upon their own 
unreasonableness.  Things that remain over the test of time simply are 
not a real problem.  You may not like them... but that is of no 
consequence.  Noisy front duplexes that develope with time  can be made 
to function as intended again, this is a wear and tear problem and 
nothing else.  Wrapped trichords and the amount of key flex are a design 
choices... period. Their is nothing here in the way of criticism that 
can not be applied at least equally to any manufacturer.  As with any 
other piano... if something is broken, you can either repair it to 
origional design... or change the design into something you are more 
comfortable with. Its as simple as that. If you change the basic 
design... then you do exactly that... no bones about it.. and no real 
problem with doing so, as long as you dont try and fool anyone about it.

The comparison with Lesters and Everetts is... well rather revealing me 
thinks.  That said,  any piano--- any product at all that undergoes 
significant design change as part of a rebuild means that said product 
no longer represents the intent of the origional builder.  What on earth 
is the big problem with that ?  I dont get it at all.  Why would anyone 
want to go through all the trouble to redesign something without taking 
full and unabashed credit for the effort.  And why does this have to 
include such acidric commentary directed at one single and particular 
manufacturer ?  Oddly... I dont hardly hear any of the same kind of 
commentary for Yamaha, Bosendorfer, Mason and Hamlin, Sauter, Fazioli, 
Kawaii.  It seems that only Steinway is to be attacked thus... time and 
time again.

To bad too... just as I was getting enthusiastic about checking out some 
of the handiwork, all this name bashing gets mixed into the equation.

RicB

Ron N wrote:

I agree. Now, how many professional techs have you talked to who
believe the Steinway pitch without question? There have been a
number of discussions on this list with techs arguing against the
least deviation from the manufacturer's original "intent", whatever
that might be. Interspersed, are rants, cries for help, and general
grunching about Teflon bushings, short damper levers, dragging
pitmans, flexible key sticks, noisy duplexes, dead trebles, killer
octaves, wrapped trichords, etc. My attitude is that if these things
are there by intent, shut up about it and enjoy them as part of the
word's finest piano. If they aren't there by intent, then the
manufacturer screwed up, and we should be required, not allowed, to
correct them with rebuild..

Oddly, I don't recall anyone having a single objection to modifying
Everetts, Bradburys, Lesters, and such. For the most part, It seems
that only Steinway had "intent" toward the character of their product.

Ron N