37 steps---delayed response

[David Love]

David:  

I wouldn't give the procedural parsing to much thought.  Sometimes people
just need their own self serving angle.  The steps that Yamaha provides in
their class are designed to give an overview and sequence to a comprehensive
regulation process and to help insure that you don't do things in an order
which is counterproductive.  There is nothing inherent in their procedure
that states once through and you're done.  Clearly a second pass, as it
were, is often necessary depending on the state that the action is in when
you start.  Some procedures will influence others and some will not.  As in
all things, common sense (being none too common) should prevail.  While some
people may prefer the just start somewhere and do it approach, the 37 steps,
viewed in this way, would be a benefit to most.    

David Love
davidlovepianos at comcast.net 
www.davidlovepianos.com

-----Original Message-----
From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf
Of David Ilvedson
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 8:03 PM
To: pianotech at ptg.org
Subject: Re: 37 steps---delayed response 

First, I hate to sound like I'm defending Yamaha's regulation effort at all
costs.   Of course we do things first that have to be done first...Roger's
jumping springs, for instance...your entire list of pre-regulation.   I do
know that LaRoy and Yamaha didn't work out there approach thinking we can
leave that out because any idiot knows to bed the keyframe first etc.   

"Then why title it and present it as if it were a linear sequence?  I think
Yamaha is sending a mixed message here that is responsible for an awful lot
of confusion and misunderstanding among piano technicians."   

Just curious...have you ever taken a LaRoy Edwards class?    But explain to
me how the 37 steps is responsible for confusion and misunderstanding among
piano technicians?   

David Ilvedson, RPT
Pacifica, CA  94044

----- Original message ----------------------------------------
From: "Israel Stein" <custos3 at comcast.net>
To: pianotech at ptg.org
Received: 2/8/2008 4:28:39 PM
Subject: Re: 37 steps---delayed response   


>At 11:00 AM 2/8/2008, pianotech-request at ptg.org wrote:
>>Israel,
>>
>>Obviously, a short email message can't convey your approach and no 
>>offense, but I don't
>>get how this is a clearer and less potentially misleading conceptual 
>>framework.    In your class you would have to list your stages and 
>>all that is included in each stage, right?
>>   Certainly things have to be done in the right order.   You don't 
>> align hammers to strings without tightening action screws, 
>> etc.   Surely, you have class handout?
>>
>>David Ilvedson, RPT
>>Pacifica, CA  94044

>Actually, David, wrong on all counts. No handouts, no sheets, no 
>lists in my classes. They learn by doing - you get an action model 
>and you learn how to regulate by regulating. I give them a short 
>verbal introduction  What typically happens is that I explain to them 
>the various stages - and most everyone (except for the rawest 
>beginners - the class is not aimed at them)  can right away tell me 
>themselves what functions are dealt with in each stage. It's just 
>logic - don't need a list. After that they dive right in, sink or 
>swim. With plenty one-on-one coaching and occasional short 
>discussions of what was done, how and why it works or doesn't... And 
>they learn to see whether or not something was done from the results 
>- not from checking an item off on a sheet. That's what I keep trying 
>to tell you - the action itself can tell you what needs to be done 
>when.  I just show them where to look and how to read analyze the 
>relevant information.

>As far as tightening screws, I did not include that stage in my 
>"Regulation" concept because I feel that all that is "pre-regulation 
>repairs". The action has to be in good repair before you can regulate 
>it - screws tight, center pin friction correct, stripped screws 
>repaired, lubrication points lubricated, keys eased, broken parts 
>replaced, rep springs cleaned, keypins and capstans 
>polished,  etcetera (see my reply to Roger Jolly). If you want to 
>conceive of it as the first stage of regulation - fine. But 
>conceptually it is once again a totally different beast from aligning 
>parts, or working out specs, requiring a different mindset and 
>approach. Anything broken or worn or loose or tight or dirty? Fix it. 
>There's lots of truth in Cy Schuster's little joke about the "very 
>first step" - tightening screws has more to do with fixing and 
>cleaning than with regulating.

>If you toss away your linear thinking and really get into this 
>scheme, you will see that within each stage, the precise order of the 
>individual steps is not all that crucial - you are going to have to 
>go back and forth somewhere, it's a circle - not a line... From the 
>messages posted by the likes of David Andersen and Roger Jolly it's 
>obvious that different circumstances require different orders - they 
>are determined empirically, by observation. I try to teach the 
>students what to observe and how to go from there... And where the 
>exact order is important - well, it's pretty obvious. Any idiot can 
>understand and remember that you can't set key level before bedding 
>the keyframe. Don't need a list for that... But does it really matter 
>whether you level the keys first or space the hammers to strings 
>first? Has more to do with how your shop is set up and whether or not 
>you use lead weights or transfer jigs than with anything else...

>The point of this conceptual organization is that students deal with 
>a small number of function in each stage, thoroughly learn the 
>relationship between these functions and how they affect each other 
>and are then able to erect their own order of regulation suited to 
>each particular situation they encounter. And the relationship 
>between the stages is just common sense logic. So who needs a list 
>and a pre-determined order of steps?

>Israel Stein