At 02:58 AM 11/30/98 -0500, you wrote: >I would appreciate the advise of PTG members on the proper way to >restore old and antique musicial instruments. Does the PTG believe >that all old musicial instruments should be restored 100% originial as >they were made in the factory? Or is it proper to "alter" the originial >design of a old instrument? * This, ultimately, has to be worked out with the customer. If they want it to work like new, but don't want you touching it, then you had just as well pass because that isn't going to happen. The reality is that something that isn't currently functional will have to be changed to some degree in order to make it functional. The degree of change, either necessary or desirable, is what's at issue here. First off, old doesn't automatically equate to antique. People are constantly calling me to reel off a fifteen minute memorized litany describing the fabulously valuable antique baby grand upright piano with the gorgeous case and the beautiful tone that they stole at auction for a mere $3000, and the man said those keys that don't work will be fixed with tuning. It's usually a 1923 Vose, or some such beater, and isn't worth the time the phone call took, much less a condemnation service call. If the instrument is truly a historically significant piece, pass it on to someone qualified to do the enshrinement, otherwise it's just old, needs extensive work, and will not be in original condition when you finish. This has to be settled with the customer in either case, before anything is done. >I ask this because in addition to tuning pianos, I restore old reed >(pump) organs. The Reed Organ Society has a monthly magazine and a >internet list which I belong. I recently posted that I tune reed organs >to A-440 (most were tuned to around A-435). Not one reed organ >technician thought it was proper at all to tune them to A-440, but they >said they should be left at their originial pitch. * Why? >I got all kinds of "hate" mail from the purists for daring to alter the >design of these valuable instruments from their originial design. I >mentioned I sometimes do a few other alterations to make them a better >instrument. Well, I have been sick over this since because I have no >desire to harm the historic value of any old antique. * I've seen some truly shabby design 'features' in reed organs through the years. Having the customers' permission to do what is necessary to make the thing work reliably, I make whatever changes I consider to be reasonable and necessary for function. Restoring a poorly engineered system to it's original configuration will probably win you a series of call backs and complaints of poor instrument performance for your trouble. Do which ever you think is 'right'. As for the value of reed organs, you almost have to pay someone to haul them off in this part of the country. Selling one for even the cost of the rebuild is virtually impossible, but people will pay to have one they paid way too much for rebuilt. Go figure. These are the kind of sensible attitudes you are up against. >Please tell me what some of you technicians feel about this. If reed >organs should not be altered or changed in any way, wouldn't this apply >to all anitique musicial instruments as well as pipe organs, old >radios, old wind up phonographs and even furniture? > >The purists believe that everything should stay the same on restoring >old antiques. What is the general thinking on this today and where do >we draw the line. > >Thanks > >Jim Turner * Ultimately, it's the owner's call. If you can't agree, don't take on the work. Ron
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC