Hi Fred and all others, comments below
I agree. I certainly don't endorse an all-Anything for everybody. I
guess I don't see that happening in a practical sense - the entire
country being "taken over" by all-Steinway. In any case, I hate to
see us as cauts getting into battle array to try to stem the tide
of those horrible Steinways. It just doesn't make sense to me as an
attitude for us to take. By all means, let us do our best to
promote the idea of diversity, and try to make that a practical
reality where feasible. But I think that we cause ourselves and our
profession harm by engaging in this kind of negative campaigning.
Regards,
Fred Sturm
While I myself share opinions that go along the lines of encouraging
diversity, I find the whole issue quite a bit more complicated then the
4 points thread offered by Fred earlier and followed up by several others.
First off, Steinways are not horrible. They are fine instruments that
have their own characteristics. If we as technicians are to simply
encourage our employers to focus on our technical skills then we have no
business condemning any such instrument. Indeed, an instrument type need
be truly unmitigated trash to be ruled out from a technical point of view.
The 4 points raised earlier are most certainly points I would not
support in any discussion I were to be included in regarding
Conservatory purchasing. Not because I agree with them or not, but
because those kinds of issues are simply none of my business. I have
been and am at present involved in this kind of discussion at one of my
work places. My position is strictly to deal with whether or not I can
service these to the faculties satisfaction or not. And there is simply
no question as to that. They are fine instruments to work with. I would
say the same about any decent quality instrument.
If pressed on other issues, and I am indeed pressed to give an opinion
that is based on the insight my technical life gives me to the business
at large, I underline first and formost that all such issues are in the
end the faculties responsibility to take decisions on, not mine. Then I
give them what I know about the business at large with all the pros and
cons as I can see. This gives rise to an entirely different set of
points to raise for them. One important pro and con I always underline
is that on the one hand the name Steinway IS attached in the world at
large to a stamp of Quality. It makes little difference really whether
that is deserved or not. The all Steinway stamp DOES attract attention
from serious minded pianists both students and faculty alike. On the
other hand, any decision to go with an all-anything solution limits
diversity... which, along with all ITS ramifications should be considered.
I could go on with a several more pros and cons examples... but my point
is made I think. Our "job" in such situations is simply to provide
technical assurance that any instrument being considered is serviceable
or not. It is not our "job" in any sense of the word to try to influence
one way OR the other what our schools decide to purchase beyond that
single point. If pressed for a statement of opinion on all these other
issues, we should simply provide as balanced and as varied a set of pros
and cons about any given type of purchasing approach as our insight into
this world of pianos allows us.... and no more.
While I am personally a fan of diversity.... I am completely against
forwarding my own personal agenda.... or anyones. In the end, its the
administration and teachers who have to decide what is all in all best
for the school, and there is a lot more involved then just whether a
piano is usable or not.... tho to be sure that has to be a part of any
bottom line.
Cheers
RicB
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC