Hi Jeff
I think you do an excellent job (aside from where you digress into
reducing a part of my reasoning as laughable) in illustrating the two
basic positions on the issue of certification. We have all been through
the arguements many times with many people, and as most of your
questions seem rhetoric (not meant in any kind of a negative sense mind
you) and in as much as my previous posts rather cover why I think why I
do, I will just let your well written post stand for what it is.... an
excellent comparison of two opposing viewpoints.
Only one point to make. Nobody I know of on this list deserves to have
anything that is on their mind described as laughable. We are all
pretty serious minded people here. I would never dream of making such a
comment... even if underlined bigtime as lightly mean I know what kind
of a ration I would get for doing so.
Ok ??
Cheers... and really by and large I thought your post was well stated.
I disagree but hey... who says we have to agree :) I would point out
tho that if we are to accept the basic perspective your post
represents... then ya'll better just accept things as they are and be
done with it... because wanting more respect is in essence asking to
both eat your cake and keep it as well. JMVOTM :)
RicB
On Oct 20, 2007, at 5:41 AM, Richard Brekne wrote:
> An interesting post from Richard West which echos many a familiar
> theme.
> I keep going back to a point I find central and at the very core of
> the whole issue. There is no real uniform formal education for
> pianotechs in the States, and many other places. Certainly nothing
> that is uniform despite a few piano technology schools around the
> country. And there is absolutely no form of accountability required
> of anyone to in some fashion or another demonstrate they have even
> the slightest idea of what they are doing in order to start working
> as a <<paid piano tech>>.
>
> I look back at my own career and think time and time again... if
> I'd only had even a reasonably decent starting point where would I
> be now.
Hi Ric,
I have to ask, if there had been only one path to this profession,
and it wasn't the one you took, would you have taken it? (and you
can't say, "knowing what I know now" because you couldn't have)
When I was looking into this craft at the age of 17, there was no
internet. There were few piano tuners in my area and they didn't
want you to find out how to learn the business. (The one who
serviced my mom's piano was quite irritated by my pursuit.) And
there was zero PTG presence. I had no idea schools like North
Bennett Street even existed. And even though I assumed they probably
did, I didn't have a way to find out where they were or how to
contact them. Many miracles have occurred in my life to get me where
I am today, and the path I took into this work was one of them. If
there had been only the trade school path, or if you had to go to a
certain university in some state 1000 miles away, who knows what I
would be doing today. It probably wouldn't have been piano work,
though, because when I first pursued it, I wasn't looking at it as a
career. I was just looking for a way to make extra money through
college. I had no idea what I was going to do, but piano work has
always been the "fall back".
> At the age of 55 I am a fair ways down the road... but I did nigh
> on 20 years before I walked through that RPT door (or something
> similar) and found out how much more there was to learn. That very
> door is the one we should be walking through after 3 years of
> journeyman training. That was what was at the core of the old
> German system which actually forbid by law the journeyman to have
> his/her own workshop. You had to reach for and attain Meister
> level. And you could not even start on that until you had at least
> 5 years experience after Journeyman certification was achieved.
> Something on these lines at least.
You have identified the source of the issue at heart: In the US,
there is no government regulation of the piano service profession.
Without government regulation, no single independent organization or
entity can have a monopolistic control on curriculum, method or
certification of persons who want to engage in the practice of piano
service as an occupation or trade. We can have our own product that
we recommend, but we cannot assert any kind of monopolistic control
without alerting the anti trust police.
And, while it seems wonderfully idealistic, I'm not sure I agree with
the old German requirement myself, especially these days. Many a
piano tuner/technician in the US has enjoyed quite a successful
career without the need for that level of training. If you want to
go designing and building pianos, then I can understand the personal
quest for such knowledge. But that is hardly something the US
government sees as necessary to regulate, and I am glad it doesn't.
>
> Ok... so its kind of impossible to do exactly the same thing in the
> US. But what should the PTG do ? Instead of trying to put
> together essentially yet another school with its own ideas of what
> a piano tech should do... perhaps it should take initiative to
> start forming a uniform curriculum for piano technology for the
> schools that already do exist, and promote the establishment of a
> few more university levels that offer it.
You touch on another issue that no one has brought up. The PTG is
not an accredited educational institution. As such, any PTG
sponsored certification or other credential has no real credibility
other than the endorsement of an association of business people in
the same industry who have assembled a set of ideals they see as
essential for someone else to enter the profession as their competitor.
Our weakness is that there is no impartial independent entity
overseeing and accrediting our process. As idealistic as we would
like to believe we are, the reality of it is that we can't be seen as
an impartial jury.
> Establishing degree requirements for what a CAUT head technician
> should be able to do or not might be a bit easier that way. RPT
> and Masters memberships requirements could be simply a matter of
> completing the required courses at universities offering them.
>
> What should a CAUT head tech be able to do ? Well, he/she should
> have a fair amount of physics and math under the belt... relevant
> to piano design issues. A thorough knowledge of general woodworking
> skills, a fair degree of administration skills, enough rebuilding
> skills to either do a complete rebuild even tho such jobs may be
> contracted out, and a fair amount of pedagogic skills in as much as
> furthering the education of fresh journeymen is a necessity in any
> large institution. At least an associates degree in music with
> piano as the central instrument should also be in the picture.
Why? This is by far the most humorous suggestion I see from time to
time. What in a music degree curriculum does anyone see that
prepares anyone for piano maintenance work? or inventory
management? Certainly there is no harm in someone having a music
degree, but it is absolutely laughable to suggest that the curriculum
of a music degree prepares anyone for much of anything except music
performance or the teaching profession. Where do the physics and
woodworking skills come from in that degree program? Some advanced
math is generally required, but my recollection was that it didn't
exceed beyond college algebra or pre-calculus. Administration
skills? from a music degree? They don't even teach the logistics of
presenting a concert let alone administration skills!
Yes, recognizing good piano tone and understanding how to achieve it
through playing are things that a piano degree might help with. But
it does not take a music degree in piano to learn these things. I'd
even assert that it is something that some people can just plain be
born with.
> A CAUT head technician is in the end responsible for all these
> things, and more...even tho some of these things may be delegated
> or contracted to others.
> Of course such a person requires several years of experience after
> a base education to get there. My point is that that journey is all
> to all to often made wayyyy to long simply because there is no
> requirement and nearly in practice no existance of a reasonble
> starting point from which to begin that journey.
>
We enter this profession from too many different corners of life to
establish one perfect way of getting into the business. Our craft is
treated as a hobby here. That is the best way to accommodate the
different types of people and learning styles that come into the
business. I absolutely respect what is done at the schools like
North Bennett St. But we just can't all drop our lives and move up
north for a year.
> The PTG does an admirable job of making the best out of a loosing
> proposition IMV. The dedication to improving ones skills and
> helping others relies in the end so much on idealistic principles
> that the problems we face in reaching both techs, administrations,
> pianists, and the general public is the most predictable of results
> possible... and at some point we will IMHO reach a wall we will not
> get through.
I agree with this, I think? I'm not quite certain I understand it
clearly though.
>
> Only when those that hire and use us truly have a sense of what our
> work is about and how much learning, skill, and experience it takes
> to get good at it will we break through that wall. I fear we
> simply will not much farther in that effort by staying on our
> present course.
I'm not sure it is a wall that can be broken through. We work with a
faculty of people who were all educated via an established system of
accredited institutions. Within those individual institutions, each
different department and school has checks and balances on each other
under the umbrella of the overall institutional administration. To
them, it is simply "the way it is done." We don't have access to
that "way". It is impossible in the US to establish a similar
training path for piano technicians. It would be far too
uneconomical to implement undergraduate programs in piano technology
all over the country, and it just doesn't make sense. It simply
isn't necessary.
In that regard, our career training path is simply different from
that of the other faculty members of our institutions. They cannot
relate to it. And though many among us may well have taken the
educational path they share, the reality is that that path will have
been taken in something unrelated to piano maintenance. That is our
brick wall.
And that is ok. Not every profession requires the collegiate path to
attain success (in fact, I think we way over sell the college
education to too many people who don't need it). Watch the movie,
"The Pursuit of Happiness" (based on a true story of a man's quest to
become a stock broker). Not everybody gets there the same way. And
it's ok.
My thoughts,
Jeff
>
> Cheers
> RicB
>
Jeff Tanner, RPT
University of South Carolina
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC