<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)"><style></style></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>If I may offer something.  Not to start this entire thread all over again because I think much that came out of it that was a real benefit and I don’t see a need to start from scratch.  But in the beginning of the discussion it was said quite explicitly that the so called “redesign” people fall into two groups (at least).  Group one consists of those who are really after something altogether different and are employing all the features fully expecting that what comes out of it will be somewhat, maybe quite, unique (when compared to the original) in its tonal output.  Group two consists of those who are employing some or all of those features in modified executions with the intention not of creating something with a completely different signature from the original but rather with the hope of enhancing the existing tonal  signature and remedy some of the “warts”, so to speak.  The point at which those features and their implementation crosses some fuzzy  line (and it is a bit fuzzy) and moves things far enough away from the original that it morphs into something quite different is not always easy to determine.  For those in group two, in fact, that is the challenge: to resolve some of the weaknesses of the original designs without making it into something not recognizable—your “joining of forces”.   There is, of course, also group three,  which I consider myself to be part of, and that consist of those who do both depending on the type of project, customer, specific piano, etc.  Some projects may adhere much more closely to the original and some might deviate considerably.   <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I won’t speak for Dale but I think I know which group he would probably place himself in.  I think I know where others who have been involved in this conversation would place themselves as well.  I don’t know who is claiming to reinvent the wheel but I think it’s important not to lump all “redesign” people in the same category.  It’s also important to recognize that those in group one are quite aware of what they are doing, I believe.  While one may not agree with it or what it produces, the piano world is replete with pianos that produce varied outcomes and I think the commitment they are making to their ideas is genuine and honest.  So to disparage  them by “legend in their own mind” comments because their goals are not in line with what you imagine to be the a more credible approach is probably not really worthy of the discussion so far in spite of the heated rhetoric that’s taken place at times.  Personally, I agree that a collaboration with pianists for concert instruments (or any instrument for that matter) is always important and for any redesigner or even for one who spends the bulk of their time rebuilding by more conventional methods, there is always a danger of working in a vacuum.   Similarly, the commitment of some manufacturers to maintain the status quo even in the face of countless reports by technicians in the field of weaknesses or failures can also be driven by something other than “a joining of forces” and can often be relegated to mere habit or pride.   The “legends in their own mind” description may just as well apply here.   <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>David Love<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>www.davidlovepianos.com<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> caut-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces@ptg.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Brent Fischer<br><b>Sent:</b> Sunday, February 27, 2011 9:35 PM<br><b>To:</b> caut@ptg.org<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [CAUT] beginning luck<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><table class=MsoNormalTable border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0><tr><td valign=top style='padding:0in 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal>Dale, so I hit send before finishing, but I think it's time to move<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>towards a progressive center of these discussions, about where<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>redesign fits into the institutional setting without compromising<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>certain Steinway tonal standards. I can't imagine any dialog  between<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>a tech and rebuilder/re-designer that doesn't include " I will re-design <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>this because my science is better than their experience."  In the <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>context of support I think the attitude should bend towards <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>how can my design work compliment the factory without alienating<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>the core tonal expectations that will exist on stage for the <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>foreseeable future.  That's the model of collaboration I believe is <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>a workable venue that will also in the end not jeopardize anyone's <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>job, either employed tech or rebuilder trying to promote a quality project.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>     What working towards the center for mutual gain means to me <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>would be for example,  introducing a re-designed Steinway into<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>a smaller recital setting, perhaps meant for more ensemble work that<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>would promote clarity and projection with a palette of color not<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>usually heard in the larger hall needing an edge. That's the <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>disconnect I am talking about here that I have yet to read over<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>the past weeks including the premise that your redesign should<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>be within some tolerance of the norm without the ego that says "this is <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>the best I've ever heard." Ya, I would say there's some bias when <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>it sounds like a few are linked into " A Legend in my own Mind.com." <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>How about joining forces with tradition to improve clarity, sustain, and <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>power without taking credit for re-inventing the wheel, just improving on it?<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Brent<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><br>--- On <b>Sun, 2/27/11, Dale Erwin <i><erwinspiano@aol.com></i></b> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><br>From: Dale Erwin <erwinspiano@aol.com><br>Subject: Re: [CAUT] beginning luck<br>To: caut@ptg.org<br>Date: Sunday, February 27, 2011, 9:02 PM<o:p></o:p></p><div id=yiv661167787><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";color:black'>  </span><span style='font-family:"Comic Sans MS";color:black'>Hey Brent<br> Disconnect? What disconnect?  <br> I guess I missed that one . So, (this designer/re-designer of a variety of types of board structures),..... was too busy working at the<u> college</u>.<br> Am I pickin up some continuous undercurrent of bias.?</span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";color:indigo'>Dale S. Erwin<br></span></b><b><span style='font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";color:indigo'>www.Erwinspiano.com<br></span></b><b><span style='font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";color:black'><br><br></span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'>-----Original Message-----<br>From: Brent Fischer <brent.fischer@yahoo.com><br>To: caut@ptg.org<br>Sent: Sun, Feb 27, 2011 7:26 pm<br>Subject: Re: [CAUT] beginning luck<o:p></o:p></span></p><div id="yiv661167787AOLMsgPart_2_ff617abb-9b5e-42f7-8099-3210ef01d89b"><table class=MsoNormalTable border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0><tr><td valign=top style='padding:0in 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal>Hey Fred, <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>   It's ironic to me that the same disconnect between "re-designers" and<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>institutions parallels in much the same way as the Steinway lack of<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>technical follow up after an "All-Steinway" school has paid a million<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>for the designation<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Brent <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><br>--- On <b>Sun, 2/27/11, Fred Sturm <i><<a href="/mc/compose?to=fssturm@unm.edu" target="_blank">fssturm@unm.edu</a>></i></b> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><br>From: Fred Sturm <<a href="/mc/compose?to=fssturm@unm.edu" target="_blank">fssturm@unm.edu</a>><br>Subject: Re: [CAUT] beginning luck<br>To: <a href="/mc/compose?to=caut@ptg.org" target="_blank">caut@ptg.org</a><br>Date: Sunday, February 27, 2011, 2:20 PM<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>On Feb 26, 2011, at 4:13 PM, Brent Fischer wrote:<br><br>>  secondly get to Steinway<br>> factory sessions often and mostly get to their C&A training in the basement<br>> and come away with their endorsement of your work, and leave your<br>> electronic tuning aid at home when you go.<br><br><br>Hi Brent,<br>    I think the C & A training (if you mean the final of the four regular one-week sessions) has changed quite a bit since you went. A couple years ago when I went, there were four of us in the usual room, and the only real difference between it and the "tone regulation" session was that we had Bs and Ds instead of smaller pianos. No work in the basement. I was disappointed, as I had heard there would only be two students, and there would be some work with the C & A guys, maybe in the basement. Of course, since then Kent Webb has taken over the "Academy" so it might have changed again.<br>    No need to leave the ETD behind, in fact better not to, as tuning was done by all four simultaneously, with only flimsy doors dividing us. Oh, and "their endorsement of your work" is at best informal. It is made clear that you are not certified by Steinway, though I did actually get a certificate for the last session. But it said something like "attended the concert prep session," not even weak wording like "completed." Obviously you can let people know you did the training, but you are not supposed to imply anything beyond that. The world changes.<br>Regards,<br>Fred Sturm<br>University of New Mexico<br>fssturm@unm.edu<br><br><br><br><br><o:p></o:p></p></div></div></td></tr></table></div></div></div></div></td></tr></table><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></body></html>