>I'll assume by "at odds with some on this list" referrs to those that >replace parts and perhaps make some modifications? Yes, it refers to those that perhaps make some modifications or perhaps feel that previous designs are inadequate or obsolete. There have been many discussions on the list since I've been a subscriber about what constitutes restoration or rebuilding, how much modification results in a piano that is markedly different from the original maker's intent, what's ethical and what's not, what's appropriate and what's not, etc. This fellow is offering his view, which I found interesting, and which I thought might be interesting to others that participate in these discussions, whether they agree with him or not. I admire him for having a set of values which he can elucidate which guide his work. >I read his statement and did not find anything at odds there. He is trying >to restore pianos. Folks who replace and or redesign pianos are not trying >to restore an instrument, they are creating a new one from an old carcass. Yes, I see that. I must have a different interpretation of what he has to say. My interpretation was that, for him, working on a piano means restoration. Redesigning and remanufacturing are not options because they are inappropriate. In my opinion that puts him at odds with those that are 'creating a new one from an old carcass'. > IMHO there is quite a difference between restoring a piano and > rebuilding or remanufacturing a piano. Yes, I agree. >If you are trying to know/experience/whatever the piano as it was >originally created - restore it. If you have an idea of what a performance >piano should be and can't find one at your local dealer, then >remanufacture one. > >Terry Farrell And what is your idea of what a performance piano should be and how did you arrive at that idea? Phil Ford
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC