<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<TITLE>Message</TITLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16414" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=765412904-06082007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>The
send-to address you have is correct. Which means that the email address that you
are sending FROM is incorrect. In order to post to the list you must use the
same email address that you used to sign up for the list. In other
words, the same email address on which you are receiving these posts. Hope that
helps.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=765412904-06082007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=765412904-06082007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>--
Geoff Sykes</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=765412904-06082007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>-- Los
Angeles</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=765412904-06082007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>
pianotech-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org] <B>On Behalf Of
</B>Michael Magness<BR><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, August 05, 2007 3:12
PM<BR><B>To:</B> Pianotech List<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: Piano Training Question
(Long)<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>"Pianotech List" <<A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org" target=_blank>pianotech@ptg.org</A>> 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. <BR><BR>
<DIV><SPAN class=gmail_quote>On 8/5/07, <B class=gmail_sendername>John
Ross</B> <<A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:jrpiano@win.eastlink.ca" target=_blank>jrpiano@win.eastlink.ca
</A>> wrote:</SPAN>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">
<DIV bgcolor="#ffffff">
<DIV><STRONG><FONT face=Arial>Check that the address in your address book,
is correct.</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT face=Arial>Also sometimes there is a delay, between
posting your message, and seeing it on the list.</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT face=Arial></FONT></STRONG> </DIV>
<DIV>John M. Ross<BR>Windsor, Nova Scotia, Canada<BR><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:jrpiano@win.eastlink.ca"
target=_blank>jrpiano@win.eastlink.ca</A></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial"><B>From:</B> <A
title=ifixpiano@gmail.com
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:ifixpiano@gmail.com" target=_blank>Michael Magness</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=pianotech@ptg.org
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org" target=_blank>Pianotech List</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, August 05, 2007 5:57
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Piano Training Question
(Long)</DIV>
<DIV><BR> </DIV>Can somone help me out? My posts get thru when I
answer but not when I originate and send anyone know why?<BR><BR>
<DIV><SPAN class=gmail_quote>On 8/5/07, <B class=gmail_sendername>Geoff
Sykes</B> <<A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:thetuner@ivories52.com" target=_blank>thetuner@ivories52.com
</A>> wrote:</SPAN>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">Thank
you Israel!<BR><BR><- Insert hearty round of applause here
-><BR><BR>It wasn't until I was well into the Potter course that I
realized that there <BR>even were legit schools for piano technology.
But even if I had, age, time<BR>and resources would have prevented me
from attending one of them. Potter's<BR>course, in retrospect, was a
great primer on piano technology. If nothing <BR>else it provided me
with enough of a foundation in the craft that I could<BR>attend chapter
meetings and conferences, hold reasonably intelligent<BR>conversations
and actually understand and absorb what was being discussed. I <BR>have
had the extreme good fortune to receive much hands on training
from<BR>several notable members of the Los Angeles and South Bay
chapters. And now,<BR>three years after completing the Potter course,
and getting ready to take my <BR>second stab at the tuning exam, I am
more and more realizing just how much I<BR>have learned and mastered
since I began. I'm also realizing that as good as<BR>I think I know I am
now, even once I pass all three RPT exams I'm still <BR>going to be just
a novice. There is no replacing good mentoring, practice<BR>and years of
experience in mastering our craft. And I am looking forward to<BR>years
of continuing this learning process. I echo what Alan Barnard said:
<BR>"...it has been the PTG that made most of the difference. I would
not trade<BR>my membership in this great organization and the
association of my dear<BR>friends and colleagues for
anything!"<BR><BR>-- Geoff Sykes <BR>-- Los
Angeles<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>-----Original
Message-----<BR>From: <A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org"
target=_blank>pianotech-bounces@ptg.org </A>[mailto:<A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org"
target=_blank>pianotech-bounces@ptg.org </A>] On Behalf<BR>Of Israel
Stein<BR>Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2007 8:55 AM <BR>To: <A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org"
target=_blank>pianotech@ptg.org</A><BR>Subject: Piano Training Question
(Long)<BR><BR><BR>To the list,<BR><BR>I have been watching this
discussion with a great deal of interest, <BR>because I have been
involved in aspects of technician training<BR>through my work with the
PTG in various capacities for many years now<BR>- first on the chapter
level, then on the national - and perhaps<BR>international - scene. For
years now I have been observing technical <BR>skills attained through
various learning paths as demonstrated on PTG<BR>exams and working on
developing methodologies to fill the voids left<BR>by the typical
trial-and-error or correspondence school training that<BR>most
practitioners in our field bring to the profession. So to the<BR>extent
that I can, I'll share my observations.<BR><BR>My own background is an
echo of what others have posted. After a<BR>career in commercial
photography fizzled out, I got interested in <BR>piano technology (after
having built a kit harpsichord - but that's<BR>a different
story.) First I tried to tech myself using the
Reblitz<BR>book - after all, how difficult could it be? I found that
book quite<BR>flawed - there were a bunch of processes and procedures
described,<BR>but no overall understanding of why one was supposed to do
things<BR>this way or that way and no good understanding of how to judge
the<BR>results (most obviously of a regulation, but in other contexts
too). <BR>It was sort of flying blind - you follow the recipe and trust
that<BR>the result is correct, because Arthur says so... I then signed
up for<BR>a correspondence course - not Randy Potter's - and found the
same<BR>problem. I was doing assignments, learning nomenclature and
<BR>processes, but the piano I was working on didn't seem to be
improving<BR>much... And I had no idea what my tuning sounded like,
objectively<BR>speaking - even though I counted beats until I couldn't
hear them any <BR>more... Then life intervened...<BR><BR>Some years
later I got an opportunity to move to Boston and attend<BR>the North
Bennet Street School for 2 years, and I found out that my<BR>initial
judgements about the Reblitz and the correspondence course <BR>were
basically correct. The processes and procedures being taught in<BR>those
media were hit-or-miss at best and plain incorrect in some<BR>cases. I
did have a leg up on the other students in terms of<BR>nomenclature -
quite a bit of money spent on something I would have <BR>learned
anyway... I did come away from the correspondence course with<BR>a nice
three-ring binder which still holds some of my NBSS notes...<BR><BR>At
NBSS I got a good background on which to build a
comprehensive<BR>approach to piano technology - both the tuning and
technical end of<BR>it. And passed the RPT exams on the first try
without a hitch before<BR>completing my first year at school. And after
a bit of struggling (I<BR>am not very good at promoting myself) I have
been able to make a <BR>decent living at it, build two businesses - one
in Boston and after<BR>moving another one in California -
worked Steinway C & A in Boston a<BR>couple years after
finishing school, and now also hold a half-time<BR>University job which
gets me health insurance and retirement benefits<BR>- besides running a
very busy practice.<BR><BR>I will concentrate on the technical end -
because that's where my<BR>testing and educational efforts have been
concentrated. <BR><BR>Without a good conceptual grasp of the nature of
the technology on<BR>which the piano is based, the properties of the
materials from which<BR>it is built or which are used to service it, the
goals of the<BR>procedures one undertakes and the various possible
pitfalls of <BR>various approaches one is a very incomplete
practitioner. To be fair,<BR>some self-trained or correspondence-school
trained technicians<BR>develop this knowledge on their own after years
of experience. Many<BR>do not. And most don't have nearly enough of it
in the first years of <BR>their practice - resulting in misdiagnosed
conditions, misapplied<BR>remedies, misregulated instruments and much
wasted time. And clients<BR>being charged for - what?<BR><BR>In a school
environment one gets to internalize all of that <BR>theoretical and
intellectual underpinning as one is learning the<BR>tools and the
procedures. And in a school environment one gets<BR>immediate feedback
on the quality of one's learning. But more on how<BR>important that can
be later. <BR><BR>Soon after graduating from NBSS I got involved in PTG
technical<BR>testing - a lot more heavily than I intended to. It was a
funny<BR>story. This was the time the PTG was introducing the
current<BR>Technical Exam (late 80s) and our committee chair couldn't
make heads <BR>or tails of it - since it is based on an empirical
approach to<BR>regulation rather than just plugging in specs from a
book. Apparently<BR>a novel concept for this grandfathered RTT. So he
dumped the whole<BR>thing in my lap. I went to a convention and learned
how to run the <BR>exam from an experienced examiner...<BR><BR>Boston
was (still is) a very busy testing venue - so I got a good<BR>overview
of the skills that technicians of various backgrounds bring<BR>to the
trade. Later on I went on to head the Technical Testing <BR>program in
the San Francisco Bay area (we have an Exam Board that<BR>test all
comers - but basically covers the territory of 4 chapters),<BR>and for
the past several years the technical testing at the PTG<BR>Annual
Conventions. In addition, I have organized and taught various <BR>Exam
Preparatory classes (that's actually a major con I have
been<BR>perpetrating on the students - they are actually "basic
skills"<BR>classes, but nobody would sign up if I called them that -
pride...) <BR>So after a good 100+ exams administered and some dozens of
classes<BR>taught I can say without equivocation that many, many
candidates and<BR>students with a correspondence school, self-taught or
mentoring<BR>backgrounds are still quite deficient in basic skills.
<BR><BR>To be perfectly fair, this is not entirely the fault of
the<BR>correspondence courses, or the learning materials. Where there is
no<BR>supervised practice and immediate feedback on technique
and<BR>methodology, the opportunities for misunderstanding and
<BR>miscomprehension are endless. I have seen this in classes I
have<BR>taught and in some post-exam interviews - where I am pretty darn
sure<BR>that what the candidate or student is doing is not what the
author or<BR>instructor meant to convey. And sometimes it is a matter of
a poor <BR>grip on a tool, or an unclear sequence of actions, or a
misapplied<BR>technique due to poor understanding of the conceptual
framework on<BR>which the technique is based, or any one of dozens of
misconceptions<BR>and misapplications that are easily
corrected in the course of <BR>continuous face-to-face instruction at a
residential program that are<BR>simply not addressed or not even noticed
in correspondence courses or<BR>self-teaching. And all materials with
which I am familiar - and that<BR>includes those published by the PTG
(which I have been for the past 3<BR>years attempting to revise) contain
ineffective techniques and flawed<BR>approaches. They are all based on
learning recipes for procedures -<BR>and not on understanding the
underlying concepts, without which <BR>practitioners have no way of
assessing their own work or dealing with<BR>unexpected issues. To be
fair, some of the PTG materials do mention<BR>the importance of learning
the conceptual framework - but then expect<BR>the student to extrapolate
that from the procedures. Not effective...<BR>I hope to do something
about it fairly soon - if I can find the time.<BR><BR>With mentoring the
problem is different. All depends on the quality<BR>of the mentors. In
the past couple of years I tested several<BR>candidates from a specific
location all of whom were taught by a<BR>mentor who appears to be
superb. They displayed superior skills.<BR>Other mentors seem to produce
poorer results - and in some cases even <BR>mislead their students with
poor advice. How a beginner in the field<BR>is supposed to judge the
quality of a prospective mentor is an<BR>insoluble
problem...<BR><BR>Over the years I have tested and taught candidates
from NBSS, from <BR>the Western Ontario program, from Israel, South
Africa, Japan, China,<BR>Spain, Norway. And many US-trained candidates
who have not had formal<BR>residential training. Two patterns jump right
out:<BR><BR>1. Foreign trained technicians do a whole lot better than US
trained <BR>technicians.<BR>2. NBSS and Western Ontario graduates in
general do better than those<BR>without formal residential
training.<BR><BR>I don't know how those foreign technicians were
trained, but the<BR>results speak for themselves. And the graduates of
the formal <BR>training programs in general display a much more
confident and<BR>methodical approach to the exam tasks than many (not
all) of the<BR>others. I have on occasion come across students and
candidates<BR>without formal training who displayed superior skills
after a fairly <BR>short period of self-teaching. My conversations with
them usually<BR>reveal that they have undertaken a very disciplined and
methodical<BR>approach to training themselves - with substantial daily
practice<BR>sessions, not going on to the next task until having
mastered the <BR>previous one, a relationship with several mentors who
could serve as<BR>a check on their progress, etc. In other words, they
invested the<BR>time and effort in themselves to learn the craft
properly - often at<BR>the sacrifice of some income. My conclusion is
that a great many <BR>people who try to teach themselves - whether
through correspondence<BR>courses or other literature - simply do not
spend enough time or<BR>spend the time effectively enough to master the
skills. And some who<BR>do learn a number of skills never develop the
underlying conceptual <BR>framework on which effective practice must
necessarily be based.<BR><BR>Disclaimer: Before Paul Revenko-Jones
starts squawking, I must say<BR>that - to my knowledge - I never tested
a graduate of the Chicago<BR>School of Piano Technology, so I can't
speak to the quality of their <BR>graduates' skills.<BR><BR>OK, now to
speak of some attempts at remediation. The PTG and some of<BR>its
chapters do offer a great many classes by various superb<BR>instructors
at conventions and special events, some sponsored by <BR>manufacturers
and suppliers - others non-sponsored. Eric Schandall,<BR>Don Mannino,
Rick Baldassin, Richard Davenport, David Betts, Roger<BR>Jolly are just
some of the names that come to mind - people who try<BR>to provide that
conceptual framework which is so often missing. The <BR>problem here is
two-fold - information overload and lack of<BR>follow-up. It is just
very difficult for the average student to<BR>completely understand and
assimilate all that information in the<BR>course of a continuous
two-period session. Or whatever time frame is <BR>devoted to it at a
single event. And by the time people get home and<BR>actually
get to try it out for real - some of it has already gotten<BR>fuzzy.
This is where a residential program would provide some<BR>corrective
feedback, follow-up, reinforcement - whatever. And the <BR>information
would be presented - to begin with - in more manageable<BR>portions,
with opportunities for follow up in between - not
thrown<BR>at you all at once, because of the limited time-span of
the<BR>convention or event. Again, some people are able to come away
from <BR>some of those convention classes with that lightbulb lit up and
thing<BR>falling into place - but many do not. As a result I have heard
a lot<BR>of misconceptions and bowdlerized ideas based on what was
taught in<BR>those classes - sometimes even misquoting the source.
<BR><BR>Just a simple example. Not too long ago someone vehemently
disagreed<BR>with something I tried to teach, stating that "So-and-so in
such and<BR>such a class said that letoff affects nothing, so how can
you say <BR>that aftertouch can be changed by altering letoff" (let me
say that I<BR>don't recommend this - I just used it as an example of
relationships<BR>within the action) . Of course, "so-and-so" did not say
that "letoff <BR>affects nothing". What he said was "nothing affects
letoff" (which is<BR>true - letoff control is mounted on a rigid rail
that never moves<BR>with relation to the string no matter what else you
do to the action <BR>in the course of regulation short of altering
action geometry) Which<BR>tells me that the person in question
misremembered what "so-and-so"<BR>taught, and did not truly assimilate
the basic relationships within <BR>the action that "so-and-so" was
trying to convey - just came away<BR>with a surface meaning of the
words. And I run across stuff like that<BR>all the time - in classes and
in post-exam interviews.<BR><BR>For the past few years several of us in
the PTG have been trying to <BR>develop a methodology to convey this
knowledge in a more effective<BR>manner. We break the
instruction up into more manageable chunks that<BR>can be more easily
assimilated by students and combine it either with<BR>exercises on jigs
and models (for the less experienced students) or <BR>with actual
performance of the procedures - under the supervision of<BR>experienced
instructors. Some of these classes have been offered at<BR>PTG Annual,
State and Regional Conventions, some at chapter-sponsored<BR>events. I
am in the middle of a series of all-day Sunday classes (one <BR>per
month, three months) for the San Francisco Chapter. They do work,<BR>if
the students go home and practice what they learn at the
classes.<BR>Because we do spend a lot of time with each student on an
individual<BR>basis - making sure that they understand and follow what
they have<BR>been taught by correcting any observed technical flaws and
missteps<BR>on the spot. So these classes require a continuous
commitment - and<BR>we do have people who keep coming back and
eventually <BR>develop good skills. And they are very resource and
labor-intensive,<BR>and reach a minuscule number of people - compared to
the need. And<BR>the nominal fees which we charge for these are
typically supplemented<BR>by PTG or Chapter subsidies. In effect, the
many pay to teach the <BR>few. At some point aspirants to this
profession are going to have to<BR>realize that effective instruction
requires time and resources - and<BR>it can't all be provided by
experienced technicians at their own expense... <BR><BR>I do have to say
that some of the discussions on the PTG lists<BR>(Pianotech, CAUT,
ExamPrep) cover some topics quite comprehensively.<BR>And provide some
of that conceptual framework that I keep mentioning.<BR>And often debunk
some misconceptions rife in the trade. But again, <BR>this is short of
personal instruction, where one look, a few words<BR>and a simple
demonstration can correct many errors and increase speed<BR>or
effectiveness. And reaches relatively few people. And is episodic<BR>in
nature. But every little bit helps. <BR><BR>Before someone starts
yelping that the PTG Exams<BR>are "unrealistically difficult"
and "do not reflect real conditions"<BR>so how can I judge effectiveness
of instruction base on them - that's <BR>nonsense. A well trained,
confident technician can cope with any<BR>situation, as long as he or
she understands the basic principles of<BR>the instrument and the
craft, has a good grasp of tools and<BR>techniques and has
developed fluency through repetition. I have seen <BR>this again and
again. Most recently, a candidate who admitted to me<BR>beforehand that
he never works on vertical pianos and has never in<BR>his life replaced
a vertical shank did quite well on the exam, just<BR>using his
conceptual grasp of the issues involved and overall <BR>technical
skills. (He did have a brief demonstration of vertical<BR>shank
replacement the day before the exam). And I have seen
similar<BR>occurrences before. And the time allowances on the exams are
quite<BR>generous - again judging by the performance of well-trained
<BR>technicians (no matter how they were trained) who usually
complete<BR>the task - and quite well - with about 10-20% of the time
still left<BR>on the clock. I have seen technicians who accidentally
broke a part,<BR>repaired it and still completed the task with a good
score within the <BR>time allowed. If one is fluent in one's craft and
has a good<BR>understanding of underlying issues, one can operate under
all kinds<BR>of pressure and unfamiliar circumstances. If
one's training is too<BR>narrowly focused merely on following a series
of "steps" in specific <BR>situations, that is not professional-level
training, and people whose<BR>training does not go beyond that do have
trouble under pressure. And<BR>pressure on specific jobs or from
specific clients is just as much a<BR>part of the profession as anything
else...<BR><BR>OK, sorry for some of the rambling here, but I hope some
of this<BR>stuff gives a somewhat realistic picture of the pitfalls of
trying to<BR>teach yourself a profession. And they are not
insurmountable - all it <BR>takes is time and commitment and some good
contacts... And if you can<BR>see your way to going to school - do it.
It will be worth every<BR>minute and every penny.<BR><BR>Israel
Stein<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR><BR
clear=all><BR>-- <BR>Michael Magness<BR>Magness Piano
Service<BR>608-786-4404<BR><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.ifixpianos.com/" target=_blank>www.IFixPianos.com
</A><BR>email <A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:mike@ifixpianos.com" target=_blank>mike@ifixpianos.com
</A></BLOCKQUOTE></SPAN></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR><BR
clear=all><BR>-- <BR>Michael Magness<BR>Magness Piano
Service<BR>608-786-4404<BR><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.ifixpianos.com/"
target=_blank>www.IFixPianos.com</A><BR>email <A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:mike@ifixpianos.com" target=_blank>mike@ifixpianos.com</A>
</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>