tuning exam in US

[Richard Moody]

> > That the Guild doesn't issue "aural certificates" or "machine
> > certificates" I think is missing out on a significant issue of
> > interest
> > to many in the Music Industry and the private sector as
> > well.
>
> This has been suggested in the past (by me at one point), but
PTG has
> opted to stick with the present system which is a good one.
>
> Kent Swafford
>
 I do agree that the present system of testing is  good, sound and
valid. I have taken part of the test (temperament) under an
experienced  tech, though I did not do it officially. I am loath
to be a name dropper since I consider the opportunity an ultimate
learning experience from the consummate technician on the top
shelf of the Guild.  But if you are ever in Phoenix be sure to
look up Jim Coleman and enjoy his expertise and hospitality.
I asked if the candidate could hear the piano as agreed upon by
the testers but he said, "No".  Nor is the piano then tuned to the
expectations of the testers after the test?  After the machine
recorded my tuning, which meant nothing to me, the aural
discrepancies were pointed out and  agreed on.  One was arguable
and it was not considered.  So I considered that very fair.
    I know that some might wonder why one doesn't go for RPT.  I
am happy to be an associate, confident in my skills that were
gained from tuners who happened not to be Guild members (predated
the Guild was one reason) but never the less were top notch, known
and respected in the Music Industry.    In the music industry
today, Guild qualification is not that important for career
advancement, it is rather like one more endorsement.  For example
tax payer supported institutions (yes music departments are part
of the Music Industry) legally cannot require Guild Membership
(for job candidates) since the Guild has no legislated government
status.  So RPT is not the same as a college degree.  It should be
but that is another matter and then of course would have nothing
to do with the Guild.
    If piano technical were a College course I think we would have
much more rounded techs.  A key board proficiency for example.
Music history, knowledge of piano music compositions, a little
music theory even.  None of the above are part of the Guild RPT
requirements.  Yet   most MI employers would look for these on
resumes, especially those who are paying almost as much for tuner
technicians as they do for professors.
    Even if there were a BS Piano technology, the Guild would
still flourish, perhaps even more.  The Journal is necessary, and
the conventions, both are vital to keeping up with the state of
the art of the profession and advancing it.
    Finally to end my apology for not participating full tilt in
the Guild, when you visit the Dallas Convention, take note of who
is part of the convention from the class presenters to the
exhibitors of who is Guild, RPT or not even Guild.  Anybody from
Steinway, Japan, Korea, China? A most knowledgeable tech from
Canada who teaches 3 or 4 classes is only an associate.
    I mean this as a tribute to the Guild in that we not only make
room for but welcome a diverse membership.   The felt maker can be
a member, the piano dealer can be a member, the piano teacher can
be a member, the refinisher, the mover, the piano owner, music
professor, all can enjoy the benefits of "associate member" which
includes a subscription to the Journal and significant discounts
to conventions and seminars.  I am happy to be an "associate"
among that crowd.
    If "associate" means beginner, perhaps the Guild should adopt
a term like "apprentice" for beginner techs, and have "associate"
signify those non technicians who may be from other parts of the
Music Industry or allied trades who have an interest in the
information, services and association the PTG has to
r.     ---rm

"Who does not understand a look, cannot understand long
explanations."
                               Arab proverb