<html> <body> Bob, But at least Goose Juice comes from a piano tech who I'm sure has used it many, many times! :-) Avery At 12:23 PM 11/30/2006, you wrote: <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">David Love writes: <dl> <dd>Sometimes spending the client’s money on the second best, even temporary, solution is necessary until such a time that the best solution can be considered.   </dl>Sure, you're right. I didn't mean to sound as if I refuse to treat tight centers. In fact, an action is coming in to the shop in February for new parts, the centers of which I juiced (Protek) last year in order to buy some time for the owner to save up. However, I think some of us, in our [noble] desire to save the client money, aren't clear enough that this is temporary, and will be on top of the expense of an unavoidable parts replacement, and fairly soon at that. On a high-performance, multi-tens-of-thousands piano, most owners understand that anything less than the correct repair will result in inferior performance, so the sooner their hopes of a cheap solution are made realistic, the better. Certainly I commiserate with them, and if they need to choose an interim solution, I'll do it cheerfully.   I have been slow to try Goose Juice, because of my past experience with products with unpublished "miracle ingredients," which turned out later to have surprising side effects. Think of silicone-bearing polishes like Pledge, which as a refinisher I've learned to hate as the new finish fisheyes. Or Teflon. Or graphited centers. At least with a known substance like naphtha and mineral oil I might be able to deduce, "hmmm, that's going to gum up when it dries for a few years." Of course, if I know I'm going to replace the parts, I don't suppose it matters what I put on. I guess I'm being unreasonable. Okay, okay, I guess I'll try it....   Bob Davis    </blockquote></body> </html>