37 steps---delayed response

[David Ilvedson]

I just don't like to see someone's considerable and valuable work be denigrated.    

David Ilvedson, RPT
Pacifica, CA  94044

----- Original message ----------------------------------------
From: "David Love" <davidlovepianos at comcast.net>
To: "Pianotech List" <pianotech at ptg.org>
Received: 2/8/2008 10:06:16 PM
Subject: RE: 37 steps---delayed response   


>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