<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" = xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" = xmlns:st1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" = xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"> <head> <meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; = charset=us-ascii"> <meta name=ProgId content=Word.Document> <meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 10"> <meta name=Originator content="Microsoft Word 10"> <link rel=File-List href="cid:filelist.xml@01C3319F.39B721D0"> <o:SmartTagType = namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="PersonName"/>  <style>  </style>  </head> <body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=blue style='tab-interval:.5in'> <div class=Section1> Bill,<o:p></o:p><= /span> <o:p> </o:p> Great = comments. That’s exactly what we need to discuss. = <o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> My first experience with the new = CAUT guidelines and an administrator was less than positive. He took one look and said = he would rather have a recommendation from the music people who understand the = issue more and could study the guidelines.  (I think the number of pages = bothered him…Didn’t want to look at it, even though he asked me to get him a copy.) They = indeed have their minds on other things.<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> We definitely need more clout, = recognition, or perceived qualifications. It will be a long term effort. I especially = like the idea of some kind of CAUT organization and accredited specialist. = <o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> <st1:PersonName>Jim = Busby</st1:PersonName> <o:p></o:p> BYU<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> -----Original = Message----- From: = caut-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces@ptg.org] On = Behalf Of Bdshull@aol.com Sent: Friday, June 13, = 2003 9:53 AM To: caut@ptg.org Subject: Re: Let's cut to = the chase was Re: Guidelines comments <o:p> </o:p> All, It's hard to know where to start in the middle of this thread - We need to address some of the other big problems which, when addressed, = will give the subject relating maintenance to longevity more punch with our administrators.. Right now we don't have the attention of school administrators - with = some exceptions, administrators don't seem to have sufficient reason or = motivation to properly fund and staff for piano service. The fundamental problem is that across the board we face an = institutional inertia.  Beyond the classic, intrinsic difficulty of obtaining = funds for rebuilding which can't seem to fit into the budget model of new = purchasing and annual maintenance is an even more fundamental issue:  School = institutions do not have the motivation to address these issues.  Institutions - = i.e. school, NASM, etc.  And there is an institutional inertia on our = side too.  This year NASM was very clear in its correspondence with us:  administrators have too many other problems than to begin a dialogue = with us on piano maintenance.  They don't want to be saddled with pressure to = spend more on pianos and piano maintenance.  If that is the position of = the dominant accreditor of schools of music in the US, I think we need to = recognize the enormity - and importance - of our task.  It involves a = long-term commitment to: developing accredited specialists in university piano service (i.e. a = CAUT curriculum within the Annual Institute and a CAUT creditial); Actively, persistently promoting the properly trained CAUT RPT to:   university administrators   piano faculty   state officials overseeing the establishment of criteria for = piano service personnel   piano manufacturers, whose retailers increasingly determine the = choice of piano          service personnel at universities. Continuing to provide documents (such as the Guidelines and the ensuing companion documents, and other publications), as well as dialogue (such = as the CAUT list, the annual CAUT forum, and state and regional CAUT events) to establish and develop a body of CAUT knowledge and practice. This is why we need to figure out ways of working with our own (CAUT and = PTG) institutional inertia.  The PTG is only beginning to realize that university piano service is at the forefront of the marketing work of = the PTG.  There is no annual budget for marketing the RPT to the = university administrators, but the home office found funds for a one-time mailer to administrators this last year.  This is the kind of thing that = needs to get into the consciousness of the efforts being made to do long-range planning.  It is not just a marketing issue, it is a training = issue, a credentialing issue, a fundamental issue of identity, even.  The driving force dictating the selection of piano technicians at = universities is often related to the success of the retail piano establishment with = its college sales.  The retail side needs our help in defining = acceptable university piano service. Surveys and studies need to be conducted, but they cost money and = require human resources.  One fundamental issue is, How many pianos does a = university actually need?  Many schools may be overstocked, sometimes with = high maintenance pianos (old unstable ones, or new unstable ones).  How = does anyone know if there are too many pianos?   NASM has no recommendations about this.  I hope that we will develop numbers relating maintenance to longevity, = so that when the time comes that we have made sufficient impact to be heard, the numbers will be there to use. Bill Shull In a message dated 6/13/03 7:29:53 AM Pacific Daylight Time, dm.porritt@verizon.net writes: <![if !supportLineBreakNewLine]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> Hammers are different, = players are different, acoustics are different (this affects how hard people will = play it), people's opinion of what's worn out are different, sound boards = efficiency are different, hammer bushings are different,...... A piano is either suitable for a purpose or it's not.  The artists = know, the technicians know and that's the criteria for doing = maintenance.  What we seem to be trying to do is to objectify the criteria enough to = explain it to the non-artist who controls the money.  I frankly don't think that = can be done.  Either the artist has credibility with the non-artist or he doesn't.  I don't think this can be reduced to an auditable data stream.  Further, our failure in this attempt will weaken our = credibility. dave *********** REPLY SEPARATOR *********** On 6/13/2003 at 3:53 PM Richard Brekne wrote: <![if !supportLineBreakNewLine]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> I aggree with this Wim. These questions should have reasonable answers, and they would be valuable to be able to put on the = table when dealing with admin folks. I just put a brand new set of hammers on = a Hamburg C in October. The instrument has been used on average 5 hours a = week since then. Just two weeks ago I had no choice but to file down a bit as = the grooves were 2 mm deep already. These were 1/2 high Strike Weights. We = all throw in data like this to a central data base.. and those answers will = reveal themselves. All we need is way of archiving the information so it is easy to arrange = in meaninful ways. RicB Wimblees@aol.com wrote: <![if !supportLineBreakNewLine]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> IBean counters not withstanding, this is still a question I would like to have answered. Airplanes fly a certain number of hours before they are = reconditioned and eventually put in the graveyard out in Arizona. We get a maintenance schedule for our cars. But what are some guidelines for pianos? How many "hours" of playing do a set of hammers get before needing to = be replaced? How many times can we restring a piano in the original pin = block. When does a soundboard need replacing? How many times can a piano be = rebuilt, with a new soundboard and pin block and strings? Last year this subject = was talked about briefly, but I don't think we ever got a definitive answer. = I realize these are all questions with lots of answers, based on usage, = climate control, budgets, etc. But this is the kind of information that would be useful, even to techs out in the field. Any one want to give some = answers? Wim   <![if !supportLineBreakNewLine]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> -- Richard Brekne RPT, N.P.T.F. UiB, Bergen, Norway <a href="mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no">mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no</a> = <a = href="http://home.broadpark.no/~rbrekne/ricmain.html">http://home.broad= park.no/~rbrekne/ricmain.html</a> <a = href="http://www.hf.uib.no/grieg/personer/cv_RB.html">http://www.hf.uib= .no/grieg/personer/cv_RB.html</a> <o:p></o:p> **************** END MESSAGE FROM Richard Brekne ********************* _____________________________ David M. Porritt dporritt@mail.smu.edu Meadows School of the Arts Southern Methodist University Dallas, TX 75275 _____________________________<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> </div> </body> </html>