[CAUT] CAUT endorsement

[William Monroe]

Jeff,

I understand your point, but I don't understand why the endorsement wouldn't
hold water?  I'd respectfully suggest that "PTG" doesn't teach other ways of
rebuilding & maintaining S&S.  The classes teach ways of rebuilding and
maintaining pianos.  S&S?  OK.  Yamaha?  OK.  Kawai?  OK.  I think the
problem is again that PTG classes teach multiple methods for dealing with
commonly and not so commonly encountered problems in pianos.  We apply
solutions to the pianos we work on.  To take that as the PTG endorsing
non-S&S practices for S&S pianos is a stretch.  The PTG is not the S&S rep,
and has no business or need to "take a stand" for "the right way" to service
S&S pianos.

Further, having been to NY and discussed some of these issues with the guys
in the selection room, and the C&A dept., and seeing that THEY don't always
agree with either the "company line" for prep, or with each other is
telling.  We are technicians.  We solve problems.  Sometimes that means
going outside the box.  Even more troubling to me is that schools could
somehow interpret a broader education, and a wider array of piano servicing
skills as somehow more problematic.  That is tragic.  My feeling is that the
PTG classes help us develop as technicians and if a school is concerned
about getting a tech who will "walk the S&S line" with them, that is a
philosophical question that is easily discovered in the interview process.
As you said, not better, just different.  To phrase another way, a tech that
doesn't believe that every OEM practice needs to be adhered to when
servicing S&S is not categorically better or worse, just different.  The
weight of the endorsement should be independent of the desire to preserve
the OEM aesthetic, no?  If the school is on-board with "All S&S", look for
the endorsement, then ascertain whether the technician will adhere to the
philosophy.

William R. Monroe



On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 4:35 PM, Jeff Tanner <tannertuner at bellsouth.net>wrote:

> Yes, William, I agree.
>
> But that's not the point.
>
> The point of my post was that as long as PTG classes teach other ways of
> rebuilding and maintaining Steinways, any endorsement by PTG of membership
> will not be respected by those who are on board with the All-Steinway
> philosophy. It was not intended at all to be a criticism of other ways of
> doing things. And yes, I agree that Steinway learns from those in the field
> who are implementing cutting edge ideas.
>
> My post was about whether or not a PTG endorsement will hold water with
> university faculties who prefer Steinway Steinways.
>
> Jeff
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ron Nossaman" <rnossaman at cox.net>
> To: <caut at ptg.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2010 11:35 PM
> Subject: Re: [CAUT] CAUT endorsement
>
>
>  William Monroe wrote:
>>
>>> I think it's fair to say that every manufacturer gets their due.  Whether
>>> on CAUT or Pianotech, many (if not all) of the major manufacturers have had
>>> shots taken at them.  Yamaha certainly, particularly when it comes to their
>>> small grands, and I'm sure a search would bring up many others, including
>>> Bosey, Kawai, Baldwin, etc.  And, while there are undoubtedly more than just
>>> Eric Schandall at NY who may not call Steinway "the best," "the world
>>> standard," or other such lofty title, there are many that do And, when you
>>> do, you can expect to be held to that when something is substandard,
>>> particularly if its chronic.
>>>  In addition, I don't know of any PTG sponsored classes on maintenance or
>>> rebuilding instruction on ANY particular brand "as is taught by" that brands
>>> reps.  Yamaha sends their reps, Kawai too.  The bulk of the general class
>>> offerings are just that, general.  We're exploring all the techniques out
>>> there for rebuilding, regulation, maintenance, etc., applicable to whatever
>>> piano you see fit.  I think this is more a symptom of the fact that S&S are
>>> among the very few brands that are profitable to rebuild.  If we could all
>>> spec rebuild Yamaha's and sell them for a profit, you'd see these techniques
>>> applied there as well.  Don't you agree?  Similarly not suggested as
>>> better/worse or with any disrespect.
>>>
>>
>> Very nicely stated. Thank you.
>> Ron N
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/caut.php/attachments/20100520/032df036/attachment-0001.htm>