Guidelines, etc.

[Donald McKechnie]

List,

Like David, I also wanted to respond to the Guidelines thread earlier
but life does indeed get in the way sometimes. Besides all the great
technical discussions on this list, it is a great opportunity for one to
find solutions to your budgetary and assistance problems. Please keep up
the discussion. It will also help the CAUT committee greatly in deciding
which way to go with the revisions.

The Guidelines will never work the same for everyone no matter how we
revise the document. But, it was never intended that it could. Tom
McNeil said as much in a similar thread not long ago. Please read the
introduction and you will see that the document is defined as a guide to
help technicians and administrators. One must come up with your own
justifications and solutions because each institution is different.

Jeff, apparently I did not train your dean well enough. Sorry about
that, let’s talk. J You are correct; one cannot compare apples to
apples. Not much sense in that. Technicians and administrators at each
institution must come up with solutions, not just keep up with the
neighbors. Comparing what other schools are doing can be part of the
justification but not the whole. At the end there is always the bottom
line (what can the school spend on the program), but what are the goals
and the values of the school? When a school can figure out all aspects
to the problem the program will succeed.

The Guidelines formula is certainly a problem when presented to
administrators. I believe that it needs to be flexible to the given
situation. Change the base number to 80 or 100 if you have to. No, it is
not ideal but you have to do whatever works.

I still believe that the Guidelines can be revised and beefed up a bit.
The idea is to give as much help to everyone as possible. If you get a
little help from the document, it was worth the time spent by all those
who have developed it.

You may remember my mentioning the Robert Weirich article in the
September issue of Clavier magazine about the state of "conservatory"
pianos. I wrote a response to the article and I am told it will be
printed in the November or December issue. My hope is that this will be
the beginning of a dialog with technicians, faculty and administrators.

Below is the letter that will be printed in Clavier. I was told that it
would not be shortened for space and other responses to the article will
be printed. In the letter I made reference to the annual in Reno. At the
time I thought something could be pulled together for the CAUT forum but
time has run out to do anything substantial for next year. Also, I
believe that Chicago in 2002 is a better location geographically for the
event I propose. This will be a good time and place to have a Summit on
the Piano in Academia. The idea is to get technicians, faculty,
administrators and piano manufacturers all in one place for a day for
discussions, workshops and classes. The CAUT committee will be talking
about this proposal but any input greatly appreciated.

Don McKechnie
Ithaca College


Let’s Get This Problem Out of the Woods!

I am writing in response to Robert Weirich’s article "Out of the Woods"
published in the September 2000 issue. On behalf of all piano
technicians who do institutional work, I want to thank Dr. Weirich and
Clavier magazine for his important message.

For more than a decade, the College and University Technicians Committee
(CAUT) of the Piano Technicians Guild (PTG) has been working on the
issues Dr. Weirich addresses so well. It is heartening to see a highly
respected musician and pianist talk about the piano maintenance problems
encountered in so many schools. There are conservatories, colleges and
universities in the United States and Canada that have successfully
taken on the challenges of proper piano maintenance, but they are in the
minority.

In 1990 the CAUT Committee published "The Guidelines for Effective
Institutional Piano Maintenance. (For a hardcopy, contact The Piano
Technicians Guild at: 816/753-7747 or ptg@ptg.org. To view the
Guidelines and obtain a database to use the Guidelines formula go to:
http://www.mursuky.edu/caut.php/guidlines_pg.htm)

Although the CAUT Committee is currently in the process of revising this
document, it still has a wealth of information for technicians,
professors and administrators to assist them in the justification for
expenditures that they are seeking. Piano manufactures are gradually
realizing that it is in their best interests also to get involved in
these issues. Steinway has published Institutional Guidelines in a
software format, yet another useful tool to justify your needs. (Contact
Steinway representative Gary Green, 800/366-1853)

The CAUT committee is revising its Guidelines to find new, creative ways
to lend support to our convictions. The document also needs to address
the problem that many schools have: no full-time piano technician on
staff.  Of course, there are schools that cannot afford full-time
technicians due to the size of their programs, but the budget problems
for adequate piano maintenance are the same.

Administrators and Boards of Trustees have an enormous challenge to
decide spending priorities. It is often those that can clearly define
their priorities that will get the attention of Boards and
Administrators. If you can show that in the long run the school will
loose money, you may suddenly see your needs become a higher priority.
Also, no school likes to experience the loss of prestige that can occur
if a music program deteriorates due to poorly maintained instruments.

It is our hope that many more piano professors and performers recognize
the urgency in this matter. Organizing is key to making inroads. Members
of the PTG are prepared to meet with the many organizations that are
linked with academia to discuss the issues that Dr. Weirich addressed.
We will be happy to attend any teacher’s conference for dialog around
these issues.

The PTG has an annual international conference each year. The CAUT
Committee usually plans an entire day of activities devoted to our
concerns and expanding our knowledge. We would be glad to meet with any
delegation from teachers’ organizations to talk about and build
strategies for our mutual issues. Our next annual conference will be
held in Reno, Nevada July 11-15, 2001.

In 1990 the CAUT Committee attempted to get The National Association of
Schools of Music (NASM) to recognize our Guidelines in some fashion.
Although we were not successful in 1990, we will attempt to dialog with
them again when our Guidelines revisions are finished. By persuading a
body such as NASM that the CAUT Guidelines are a valuable tool, we can
gain much momentum. With teachers, piano technicians and piano
manufacturers uniting, we will be able to see real progress in the
quality of institutional piano maintenance.

Sincerely yours,

Donald R. McKechnie
Staff Piano Technician at Ithaca College
Chair, CAUT Committee of the PTG