"Pianotech List" <pianotech at ptg.org> This is what I have in my address book it looks exactly the same as the address at the top of the replies. My previous posts were at 1:52AM and 3:15 PM today, I would have though one or both would have showed up by now. The first from this AM I copied and pasted into a reply when I realized it wasn't going to show up. On 8/5/07, John Ross <jrpiano at win.eastlink.ca> wrote: > > *Check that the address in your address book, is correct.* > *Also sometimes there is a delay, between posting your message, and seeing > it on the list.* > ** > John M. Ross > Windsor, Nova Scotia, Canada > jrpiano at win.eastlink.ca > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Michael Magness <ifixpiano at gmail.com> > *To:* Pianotech List <pianotech at ptg.org> > *Sent:* Sunday, August 05, 2007 5:57 PM > *Subject:* Re: Piano Training Question (Long) > > > Can somone help me out? My posts get thru when I answer but not when I > originate and send anyone know why? > > On 8/5/07, Geoff Sykes <thetuner at ivories52.com > wrote: > > > > Thank you Israel! > > > > <- Insert hearty round of applause here -> > > > > It wasn't until I was well into the Potter course that I realized that > > there > > even were legit schools for piano technology. But even if I had, age, > > time > > and resources would have prevented me from attending one of them. > > Potter's > > course, in retrospect, was a great primer on piano technology. If > > nothing > > else it provided me with enough of a foundation in the craft that I > > could > > attend chapter meetings and conferences, hold reasonably intelligent > > conversations and actually understand and absorb what was being > > discussed. I > > have had the extreme good fortune to receive much hands on training from > > several notable members of the Los Angeles and South Bay chapters. And > > now, > > three years after completing the Potter course, and getting ready to > > take my > > second stab at the tuning exam, I am more and more realizing just how > > much I > > have learned and mastered since I began. I'm also realizing that as good > > as > > I think I know I am now, even once I pass all three RPT exams I'm still > > going to be just a novice. There is no replacing good mentoring, > > practice > > and years of experience in mastering our craft. And I am looking forward > > to > > years of continuing this learning process. I echo what Alan Barnard > > said: > > "...it has been the PTG that made most of the difference. I would not > > trade > > my membership in this great organization and the association of my dear > > friends and colleagues for anything!" > > > > -- Geoff Sykes > > -- Los Angeles > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org ] On > > Behalf > > Of Israel Stein > > Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2007 8:55 AM > > To: pianotech at ptg.org > > Subject: Piano Training Question (Long) > > > > > > To the list, > > > > I have been watching this discussion with a great deal of interest, > > because I have been involved in aspects of technician training > > through my work with the PTG in various capacities for many years now > > - first on the chapter level, then on the national - and perhaps > > international - scene. For years now I have been observing technical > > skills attained through various learning paths as demonstrated on PTG > > exams and working on developing methodologies to fill the voids left > > by the typical trial-and-error or correspondence school training that > > most practitioners in our field bring to the profession. So to the > > extent that I can, I'll share my observations. > > > > My own background is an echo of what others have posted. After a > > career in commercial photography fizzled out, I got interested in > > piano technology (after having built a kit harpsichord - but that's > > a different story.) First I tried to tech myself using the Reblitz > > book - after all, how difficult could it be? I found that book quite > > flawed - there were a bunch of processes and procedures described, > > but no overall understanding of why one was supposed to do things > > this way or that way and no good understanding of how to judge the > > results (most obviously of a regulation, but in other contexts too). > > It was sort of flying blind - you follow the recipe and trust that > > the result is correct, because Arthur says so... I then signed up for > > a correspondence course - not Randy Potter's - and found the same > > problem. I was doing assignments, learning nomenclature and > > processes, but the piano I was working on didn't seem to be improving > > much... And I had no idea what my tuning sounded like, objectively > > speaking - even though I counted beats until I couldn't hear them any > > more... Then life intervened... > > > > Some years later I got an opportunity to move to Boston and attend > > the North Bennet Street School for 2 years, and I found out that my > > initial judgements about the Reblitz and the correspondence course > > were basically correct. The processes and procedures being taught in > > those media were hit-or-miss at best and plain incorrect in some > > cases. I did have a leg up on the other students in terms of > > nomenclature - quite a bit of money spent on something I would have > > learned anyway... I did come away from the correspondence course with > > a nice three-ring binder which still holds some of my NBSS notes... > > > > At NBSS I got a good background on which to build a comprehensive > > approach to piano technology - both the tuning and technical end of > > it. And passed the RPT exams on the first try without a hitch before > > completing my first year at school. And after a bit of struggling (I > > am not very good at promoting myself) I have been able to make a > > decent living at it, build two businesses - one in Boston and after > > moving another one in California - worked Steinway C & A in Boston a > > couple years after finishing school, and now also hold a half-time > > University job which gets me health insurance and retirement benefits > > - besides running a very busy practice. > > > > I will concentrate on the technical end - because that's where my > > testing and educational efforts have been concentrated. > > > > Without a good conceptual grasp of the nature of the technology on > > which the piano is based, the properties of the materials from which > > it is built or which are used to service it, the goals of the > > procedures one undertakes and the various possible pitfalls of > > various approaches one is a very incomplete practitioner. To be fair, > > some self-trained or correspondence-school trained technicians > > develop this knowledge on their own after years of experience. Many > > do not. And most don't have nearly enough of it in the first years of > > their practice - resulting in misdiagnosed conditions, misapplied > > remedies, misregulated instruments and much wasted time. And clients > > being charged for - what? > > > > In a school environment one gets to internalize all of that > > theoretical and intellectual underpinning as one is learning the > > tools and the procedures. And in a school environment one gets > > immediate feedback on the quality of one's learning. But more on how > > important that can be later. > > > > Soon after graduating from NBSS I got involved in PTG technical > > testing - a lot more heavily than I intended to. It was a funny > > story. This was the time the PTG was introducing the current > > Technical Exam (late 80s) and our committee chair couldn't make heads > > or tails of it - since it is based on an empirical approach to > > regulation rather than just plugging in specs from a book. Apparently > > a novel concept for this grandfathered RTT. So he dumped the whole > > thing in my lap. I went to a convention and learned how to run the > > exam from an experienced examiner... > > > > Boston was (still is) a very busy testing venue - so I got a good > > overview of the skills that technicians of various backgrounds bring > > to the trade. Later on I went on to head the Technical Testing > > program in the San Francisco Bay area (we have an Exam Board that > > test all comers - but basically covers the territory of 4 chapters), > > and for the past several years the technical testing at the PTG > > Annual Conventions. In addition, I have organized and taught various > > Exam Preparatory classes (that's actually a major con I have been > > perpetrating on the students - they are actually "basic skills" > > classes, but nobody would sign up if I called them that - pride...) > > So after a good 100+ exams administered and some dozens of classes > > taught I can say without equivocation that many, many candidates and > > students with a correspondence school, self-taught or mentoring > > backgrounds are still quite deficient in basic skills. > > > > To be perfectly fair, this is not entirely the fault of the > > correspondence courses, or the learning materials. Where there is no > > supervised practice and immediate feedback on technique and > > methodology, the opportunities for misunderstanding and > > miscomprehension are endless. I have seen this in classes I have > > taught and in some post-exam interviews - where I am pretty darn sure > > that what the candidate or student is doing is not what the author or > > instructor meant to convey. And sometimes it is a matter of a poor > > grip on a tool, or an unclear sequence of actions, or a misapplied > > technique due to poor understanding of the conceptual framework on > > which the technique is based, or any one of dozens of misconceptions > > and misapplications that are easily corrected in the course of > > continuous face-to-face instruction at a residential program that are > > simply not addressed or not even noticed in correspondence courses or > > self-teaching. And all materials with which I am familiar - and that > > includes those published by the PTG (which I have been for the past 3 > > years attempting to revise) contain ineffective techniques and flawed > > approaches. They are all based on learning recipes for procedures - > > and not on understanding the underlying concepts, without which > > practitioners have no way of assessing their own work or dealing with > > unexpected issues. To be fair, some of the PTG materials do mention > > the importance of learning the conceptual framework - but then expect > > the student to extrapolate that from the procedures. Not effective... > > I hope to do something about it fairly soon - if I can find the time. > > > > With mentoring the problem is different. All depends on the quality > > of the mentors. In the past couple of years I tested several > > candidates from a specific location all of whom were taught by a > > mentor who appears to be superb. They displayed superior skills. > > Other mentors seem to produce poorer results - and in some cases even > > mislead their students with poor advice. How a beginner in the field > > is supposed to judge the quality of a prospective mentor is an > > insoluble problem... > > > > Over the years I have tested and taught candidates from NBSS, from > > the Western Ontario program, from Israel, South Africa, Japan, China, > > Spain, Norway. And many US-trained candidates who have not had formal > > residential training. Two patterns jump right out: > > > > 1. Foreign trained technicians do a whole lot better than US trained > > technicians. > > 2. NBSS and Western Ontario graduates in general do better than those > > without formal residential training. > > > > I don't know how those foreign technicians were trained, but the > > results speak for themselves. And the graduates of the formal > > training programs in general display a much more confident and > > methodical approach to the exam tasks than many (not all) of the > > others. I have on occasion come across students and candidates > > without formal training who displayed superior skills after a fairly > > short period of self-teaching. My conversations with them usually > > reveal that they have undertaken a very disciplined and methodical > > approach to training themselves - with substantial daily practice > > sessions, not going on to the next task until having mastered the > > previous one, a relationship with several mentors who could serve as > > a check on their progress, etc. In other words, they invested the > > time and effort in themselves to learn the craft properly - often at > > the sacrifice of some income. My conclusion is that a great many > > people who try to teach themselves - whether through correspondence > > courses or other literature - simply do not spend enough time or > > spend the time effectively enough to master the skills. And some who > > do learn a number of skills never develop the underlying conceptual > > framework on which effective practice must necessarily be based. > > > > Disclaimer: Before Paul Revenko-Jones starts squawking, I must say > > that - to my knowledge - I never tested a graduate of the Chicago > > School of Piano Technology, so I can't speak to the quality of their > > graduates' skills. > > > > OK, now to speak of some attempts at remediation. The PTG and some of > > its chapters do offer a great many classes by various superb > > instructors at conventions and special events, some sponsored by > > manufacturers and suppliers - others non-sponsored. Eric Schandall, > > Don Mannino, Rick Baldassin, Richard Davenport, David Betts, Roger > > Jolly are just some of the names that come to mind - people who try > > to provide that conceptual framework which is so often missing. The > > problem here is two-fold - information overload and lack of > > follow-up. It is just very difficult for the average student to > > completely understand and assimilate all that information in the > > course of a continuous two-period session. Or whatever time frame is > > devoted to it at a single event. And by the time people get home and > > actually get to try it out for real - some of it has already gotten > > fuzzy. This is where a residential program would provide some > > corrective feedback, follow-up, reinforcement - whatever. And the > > information would be presented - to begin with - in more manageable > > portions, with opportunities for follow up in between - not thrown > > at you all at once, because of the limited time-span of the > > convention or event. Again, some people are able to come away from > > some of those convention classes with that lightbulb lit up and thing > > falling into place - but many do not. As a result I have heard a lot > > of misconceptions and bowdlerized ideas based on what was taught in > > those classes - sometimes even misquoting the source. > > > > Just a simple example. Not too long ago someone vehemently disagreed > > with something I tried to teach, stating that "So-and-so in such and > > such a class said that letoff affects nothing, so how can you say > > that aftertouch can be changed by altering letoff" (let me say that I > > don't recommend this - I just used it as an example of relationships > > within the action) . Of course, "so-and-so" did not say that "letoff > > affects nothing". What he said was "nothing affects letoff" (which is > > true - letoff control is mounted on a rigid rail that never moves > > with relation to the string no matter what else you do to the action > > in the course of regulation short of altering action geometry) Which > > tells me that the person in question misremembered what "so-and-so" > > taught, and did not truly assimilate the basic relationships within > > the action that "so-and-so" was trying to convey - just came away > > with a surface meaning of the words. And I run across stuff like that > > all the time - in classes and in post-exam interviews. > > > > For the past few years several of us in the PTG have been trying to > > develop a methodology to convey this knowledge in a more effective > > manner. We break the instruction up into more manageable chunks that > > can be more easily assimilated by students and combine it either with > > exercises on jigs and models (for the less experienced students) or > > with actual performance of the procedures - under the supervision of > > experienced instructors. Some of these classes have been offered at > > PTG Annual, State and Regional Conventions, some at chapter-sponsored > > events. I am in the middle of a series of all-day Sunday classes (one > > per month, three months) for the San Francisco Chapter. They do work, > > if the students go home and practice what they learn at the classes. > > Because we do spend a lot of time with each student on an individual > > basis - making sure that they understand and follow what they have > > been taught by correcting any observed technical flaws and missteps > > on the spot. So these classes require a continuous commitment - and > > we do have people who keep coming back and eventually > > develop good skills. And they are very resource and labor-intensive, > > and reach a minuscule number of people - compared to the need. And > > the nominal fees which we charge for these are typically supplemented > > by PTG or Chapter subsidies. In effect, the many pay to teach the > > few. At some point aspirants to this profession are going to have to > > realize that effective instruction requires time and resources - and > > it can't all be provided by experienced technicians at their own > > expense... > > > > I do have to say that some of the discussions on the PTG lists > > (Pianotech, CAUT, ExamPrep) cover some topics quite comprehensively. > > And provide some of that conceptual framework that I keep mentioning. > > And often debunk some misconceptions rife in the trade. But again, > > this is short of personal instruction, where one look, a few words > > and a simple demonstration can correct many errors and increase speed > > or effectiveness. And reaches relatively few people. And is episodic > > in nature. But every little bit helps. > > > > Before someone starts yelping that the PTG Exams > > are "unrealistically difficult" and "do not reflect real conditions" > > so how can I judge effectiveness of instruction base on them - that's > > nonsense. A well trained, confident technician can cope with any > > situation, as long as he or she understands the basic principles of > > the instrument and the craft, has a good grasp of tools and > > techniques and has developed fluency through repetition. I have seen > > this again and again. Most recently, a candidate who admitted to me > > beforehand that he never works on vertical pianos and has never in > > his life replaced a vertical shank did quite well on the exam, just > > using his conceptual grasp of the issues involved and overall > > technical skills. (He did have a brief demonstration of vertical > > shank replacement the day before the exam). And I have seen similar > > occurrences before. And the time allowances on the exams are quite > > generous - again judging by the performance of well-trained > > technicians (no matter how they were trained) who usually complete > > the task - and quite well - with about 10-20% of the time still left > > on the clock. I have seen technicians who accidentally broke a part, > > repaired it and still completed the task with a good score within the > > time allowed. If one is fluent in one's craft and has a good > > understanding of underlying issues, one can operate under all kinds > > of pressure and unfamiliar circumstances. If one's training is too > > narrowly focused merely on following a series of "steps" in specific > > situations, that is not professional-level training, and people whose > > training does not go beyond that do have trouble under pressure. And > > pressure on specific jobs or from specific clients is just as much a > > part of the profession as anything else... > > > > OK, sorry for some of the rambling here, but I hope some of this > > stuff gives a somewhat realistic picture of the pitfalls of trying to > > teach yourself a profession. And they are not insurmountable - all it > > takes is time and commitment and some good contacts... And if you can > > see your way to going to school - do it. It will be worth every > > minute and every penny. > > > > Israel Stein > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Michael Magness > Magness Piano Service > 608-786-4404 > www.IFixPianos.com <http://www.ifixpianos.com/> > email mike at ifixpianos.com > > -- Michael Magness Magness Piano Service 608-786-4404 www.IFixPianos.com <http://www.ifixpianos.com/> email mike at ifixpianos.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20070805/057823ea/attachment-0001.html
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC