> SO.....RPT tests are all well and good BUT what about being a piano tech > AND a pneumatic player piano technician (rebuilding, that is) AND a reed > organ technician (again rebuilding) What about it? And what about piano rebuilding in general, and what about redesign and re engineering of everything from actions to soundboards and bridges to plates? These don't have anything to do with basic piano service. > Anyway, my point is, RPT testing is only half the battle of the piano > tech when it comes to dealing with a pneumatic player. That's true, which is why the vast majority of player rebuild jobs I've seen have had little or nothing done to the pianos, which needed rebuilding at least as badly as the player. With the exception of the rare player grand, no one these days seems to be willing to spend what it takes to do the whole job, and as long as I can eat doing something better, I'll continue as I have for thirty years now, to turn down work doing just the player. > Plus, where is the RPT equivalent to rebuilding an antique reed organ - > of which I half done about 12 for customers. I've done at least twice that many, but don't see the problem. A reed organ isn't a piano any more than a pneumatic player mechanism is, so why would the *Piano* Technicians Guild care about qualification testing in these areas when they don't have anything in place (nor is it likely to be possible) to qualify piano rebuilding? There is also some difference in technical complexity between rebuilding pianos and rebuilding foot powered harmonicas (magic as they are, they still are what they are). > Since the guild seems, IMHO, to be geared to grands and -most- think the > lesser of uprights and even lesser than that of players ... where in the > guild is there an RPT status for pneumatic player technicians. That's not the Guild. That's everyone. How many times have you heard "It doesn't have to be perfect, it's just a player"? This is the universal mantra for (often only partially) rebuilding the player mechanism and putting it back into a realistically non functional piano, and the attitude exists in the owners as well as in the techs. > For those of you out there that know, being a pneumatic player tech > -along- with having a family and responsibilities - there is virtually > NO time to study for the tests, let alone wanting to pass only half of > the puzzle (the piano side, leaving out the player side). > > Respectfully, Duaine Last time I looked, the RPT tests were for the most part a realistic set of minimal standard skills that a functional piano tech shouldn't have a lot of trouble with going into cold. I'm sure that anyone in the business who could be trusted with someone's piano could brush up on the details of the testing, and fill in the gaps without expending too much effort or neglecting the family overly much. I expect they could spare a couple of evenings in there somewhere with minimal trauma, perhaps putting off the latest Linux recompile for an evening or two and studying instead. Some of us continue to find the time to progress in our professional education, and I expect you could too. There are a million justifications for not doing something, but it all comes down to one thing. You just have to want to, and if you don't, you won't. In my case, most of what I've learned about pianos, player mechanisms, and pump organs came through association with the PTG and it's membership. I figure I owe them some support in exchange. If you don't, that's fine, but the PTG's not providing qualification testing in your specialty smacks more of excuse than reason. For instance, if they did qualification testing for pneumatic players, electronic players, pump organs, rebuilding, engineering, refinishing, moving, and humidity control, where would you find the time to study for any or all of these tests when you already can't manage the existing set for RPT? Regards, Ron N
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC