[pianotech] Tuning contest proposal

[Tom Sivak]

Tuners without arms should be allowed to become RPTs too.   We are discriminating against tuners without arms by not allowing an armless tuner to simply stare the piano into tune.   Hey, if his clients are happy (they're the deaf ones, hoping to become RPTs themselves one day) who's to say they shouldn't be RPTs?

Dead people also should be able to qualify.   After all, here in Chicago, they vote.  Why not allow them to take the RPT exam?   We could call them RPTs who RIP.
 
Tom Sivak
Chicago  


--- On Sun, 12/21/08, Duaine & Laura Hechler <dahechler at charter.net> wrote:

> From: Duaine & Laura Hechler <dahechler at charter.net>
> Subject: Re: [pianotech] Tuning contest proposal
> To: pianotech at ptg.org
> Date: Sunday, December 21, 2008, 11:46 AM
> With this logic then you are completely eliminating deaf
> tuners - at
> least, deaf tuners - can - tune with ETD's.
> 
> 
> 
> So in the same breath, you are throwing out the possibility
> of deaf
> tuners - because - they can't aural tune !
> 
> 
> 
> SO THERE !
> 
> 
> 
> John Formsma wrote:
> 
>   Duaine, maybe you should consider joining the Master
> Piano
> Technicians group.  No exam requirements there.
> 
>   
>   
> 
>   
>   Or, pass the exam with an ETD.  It's allowed.
>   
> 
>   
>   Relaxing exam standards is hardly any way to retain
> qualified
> people.  If there were a doctor shortage, should we relax
> the
> educational requirements for an MD?  I hardly think so. 
> Rather,
> increase the incentive to become one.  We've dumbed us
> down too much as
> it is.
>   
> 
>   
>   People who can't learn aural
> tuning should never be turning pins for money.  People who
> won't
> learn bare minimum aural tuning should never become RPTs. 
> If you can
> tune a C5 unison, you can learn to hear a
> F3-C4 fifth.  Aw, but you know, fifths, fourths, thirds ...
> it doesn't
> matter.  Tune your thirds into fourths for all I care. 
> Just as long as
> it sounds good to you and your customers.
>   
> 
>   
>   Unisons?  Well, more people might become piano techs if
> they
> didn't have to tune good unisons.  So let's relax
> the standards there
> too.  Why not accept 2.0 cent deviations just to get more
> members?  Or
> 5.0 cent deviations.
>   
> 
>   
>   ETDs? sure!  Let's take 'em all.  Accutuners,
> Cybertuners,
> Verituners, Strobe tuners. Korg guitar tuners, and the list
> goes on.
>  And when ETDs produce varying results, let's not even
> wonder why. It
> just doesn't matter what is used, just as long as one
> can satisfy his
> customer base. 
>   
> 
>   
>   Don't make a lick of sense, do it?
>   
> 
>   
>   --
>   JF
>   
> 
>   
>   
> 
>   On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 2:57 AM, Duaine
> & Laura Hechler <dahechler at charter.net>
> wrote:
> 
>   BUT,
> the RPT tuning test is - limited - to aural tuning.
> 
>     
> 
> EXPAND the test to include ETD tunings.
> 
>     
> 
> My wife made an interesting point - how many members - quit
> - because
> 
> they only want to use an ETD - and - CURRENTLY can't be
> accepted as an
> RPT.
> 
>     
> 
> And, as my local chapter has reported, the RPT population
> of the
> 
> organization is dwindling.
> 
>     
>     
> 
>     
>     
>   
>   
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Duaine Hechler
> Piano, Player Piano, Pump Organ
> Tuning, Servicing & Rebuilding
> Reed Organ Society Member
> Florissant, MO 63034
> (314) 838-5587
> dahechler at charter.net
> www.hechlerpianoandorgan.com
> --
> Home & Business user of Linux - 10 years