S&S retrofit rails ?

[John Musselwhite]

At 10:17 AM 8/5/98 -0600, Dale wrote:

>  Then it wouldn't be a Steinway!!!!! ( I know, it would be better.)  

You are correct... it wouldn't be a Steinway, whether it's better or not.
It may LOOK like one, but it's been "altered". Check out the article in the
Journal last year (I think) on trademark infringement. Replacing an S&S
action with a totally different action is "significantly altering the
product" and a permanent marker has to be fixed to the instrument in a
prominent place indicating that it is customized and to what extent.
Technically, even replacing action parts with Renner parts not ordered from
S&S does that, because it means that half the piano was not made (or
approved) by the manufacturer indicated on the fallboard and plate.

>   I've been informed it's a mortal sin to mess with the mystique thing. 

Not a "mortal sin", just a minor one.  B-})  Mind you, in this particular
case it's a BIG minor one... <grin>

>I know cause the local official S&S service guy has told everyone who
>will listen that I ruined a couple at the local museum by putting those
>S&S style Renner replacements on their  A  and B.     Worse,   I put Abel
>hammers on to replace the Japanese rocks previously installed.  And I
>didn't use genuine Steinway key bushing cloth to boot.  I'm a _bad_  boy.

For museum pianos, yes... you were a bad boy. The original parts should
have been rebuilt (refelted, rebushed and reps resprung) if possible and
the hammers and knuckles replaced with S&S factory parts. If the pianos
were almost anywhere else it would be between you and the customer, but
"museums" are a different thing entirely. Museum pieces, even performance
pianos, should be "restored to their original condition" and that means
original factory parts when needed, not Renner and Abel. Oh... that
includes the key bushings too. Why? In the interests of authenticity... of
passing down your work to future generations. 

Lest you think this is just a "Steinway snob" speaking, I would say the
same if it were any other brand of piano in the same situation. The
difference being mostly that Steinways are still being made, so factory
parts are available and are of good quality if the originals are totally
unsuitable. ALL original parts that are replaced should be preserved with
the instrument and not discarded, either. As others will say, because of
the situation this is a matter of conservation... of the preservation of an
historical artifact as well as the creation of a viable musical instrument.
I have even known restorers to look for parts from a piano of a similar age
that have been discarded by others in order to put some semblance of
authenticity back into "rebuilt" pianos... right down to the strings in
some cases.

>     BTW,  the people playing concerts on both have nothing but nice to
>say about both pianos.  Too bad I ruined them, huh?

You could take an old fortepiano and restring it with modern strings and
stick in a new Renner action too and performers would love it (maybe). But
it would no longer be "authentic" or a museum piece.While it's all very
well to receive kudos for a nice piano,  a non-authentic piano is just
another piano to a museum or a collector, and these instruments are no
longer authentic because half the parts do not come from the original
manufacturer. Unless major modifications have been done to the board and
bridges they aren't really ruined as the instruments are still restorable
to some semblance of authenticity.

>Watch out for the slings and arrows of righteous indignation, oh  you who
>would suggest fooling with the "MYSTIQUE".   Flames anyone?

When you restore an "antique" for a museum you should strive for
originality rather than attempting to "improve" on the original design or
customize it in any way. I see no reason on earth why S&S parts could not
have been put on these particular pianos in the first place, considering
their location. For that matter, if the parts that were on them were
original the profit from the labour involved in rebuilding them would have
gone in your pocket rather than Renner's. 

In this particular case the pianos are owned by a museum. Did you tell them
you were putting non-standard replacement parts in their Steinways? Did you
or they know their pianos would no longer be "authentic" (see above about
trademark infringement) and would be devalued by Steinway because of it?
While the pianos may be "improved" as far as their performance is concerned
they are now "just pianos", and not "authentic" Steinways with the
historical value they once had (if they had any)... they are "hot rods". 

There's my flame... and I feel it's a valid concern. Museums are a place
where the past is preserved, not "modernized", "updated" or "improved" in
any manner. If an owner wants their piano "souped up" that's a different
story all together, but if the owner is a museum or a collector,
authenticity can be worth a thousand times what the improved performance
might be worth.

			John


John Musselwhite, RPT  
Calgary, Alberta Canada 
musselj@cadvision.com 
http://www.cadvision.com/musselj