<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:st1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"> <head> <meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> <meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)"> <o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="PostalCode"/> <o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="State"/> <o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="City"/> <o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="place"/>  <style>  </style> </head> <body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=blue id="role_body" bottomMargin=7 leftmargin=7 topmargin=7 rightMargin=7> <div class=Section1> Hi Dale<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> I really don’t understand how you can call the block compromised if it has been CA’d. We are talking about blocks that are already compromised by structural failure- they don’t work. It seems to me that CA treatment “uncompromises” the compromised block. It is a treatment that has empirically been proven to work for many years. How many? Well the jury is still out because most of us haven’t been doing it longer than 5-10 years. But for Alan and myself, probably others, we have yet to encounter the piano it won’t fix. For those who have encountered such pianos, I suspect we might be able to save those pianos as well with a couple of tricks. <o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> How does CA work? It wicks into the cracks and crevices, filling voids, strengthening the cellular matrix of the wood and who knows what else. It adds to the structural integrity of the block. Far from compromising it seems to me to be enhancing it. <o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> Suppose you do have a block that CA won’t fix. What tricks would you employ that you don’t consider compromising the block? Such a block would certainly not be responsive to oversize pins, or any kind of shimming. The only fix for such a block I am aware of is drilling and plugging. That isn’t compromising the block, it is essentially replacing it. <o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> Do you have some trick or tool to use for such a block that you would not consider to be compromising? How would you fix such a problem block, short of replacing it? CA is the most permanent fix I have ever encountered short of replacing the block.<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> For those of us who have experience using it there seems to be no downside, except for the little spinet I wrote about a few days ago, the one I treated 2-3 years ago and now has pins tighter than a new <st1:place w:st="on">Baldwin</st1:place>. One other minimal downside: when it comes time to do the actual rebuild, the block needs a little extra persuasion to separate from the plate. I’ve done one of those.<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> I’ve done repining work and I’ve tuned many pianos that have been repined by others. I’ll take CA treatment any day of the week and twice on Sundays. It’s easier, quicker, more effective, cheaper for the customer and more of a pleasure to tune. And instead of spreading cracks like oversize pins, CA mitigates the problems imposed by cracks. <o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> Maybe I’m missing something. But for my customers the problem of loose pins no longer mandates a rebuild w/ new block. CA can give their piano many more years of useful life for minimal cost until other factors (dead strings, dead soundboard, etc) drive them to the rebuild. <o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> Step on in, Dale. The water’s fine. Next time you encounter a marginal pin, give it a few drops then check it again in 30 minutes. Then you’ll be a true believer as well. J<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> <div> Dean<o:p></o:p> <u1:PersonName u2:st="on">Dean May</u1:PersonName>             cell 812.239.3359 <o:p></o:p> PianoRebuilders.com   812.235.5272 <o:p></o:p> <u1:place u2:st="on"><u1:City u2:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on"><st1:City w:st="on">Terre Haute</st1:City></u1:City> <u1:State u2:st="on"><st1:State w:st="on">IN</u1:State></st1:State>  <u1:PostalCode u2:st="on"><st1:PostalCode w:st="on">47802</u1:PostalCode></st1:PostalCode></st1:place></u1:place><o:p></o:p> </div> <div> <div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'> <hr size=2 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1> </div> From: pianotech-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org] On Behalf Of Erwinspiano@aol.com Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 11:43 PM To: pianotech@ptg.org Subject: Re: Extreme measure? was RE: Pricing Pinblock Treatments<o:p></o:p> </div> <o:p> </o:p> <div> <div>   All<o:p></o:p> </div> <div>  Although I've never CA"D a block.  You all have convinced me of it's effective nature but I'm with David on this one.  The block is compromised. NO warranty implied.<o:p></o:p> </div> <div>    Also if you treat a block in this manner & Later decide it needs strings , is this treated/doped block a worthy candidate or does this not render a potentially restring able block  un useable  and, again un warrantable?  Just asking.<o:p></o:p> </div> <div>   Dale<o:p></o:p> </div> </div> <div>  <o:p></o:p> </div> <o:p></o:p> <div> <div class=MsoNormal align=center style='margin-top:7.5pt;text-align:center'> <hr size=2 width="100%" align=center> </div> Get a sneak peek of the all-new <a href="http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour/?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000982" target="_blank" title="http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour/?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000982">AOL.com</a>.<o:p></o:p> </div> </div> </body> </html>