<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> </head> <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"> <blockquote> </blockquote> Hi Stéphane This was a particularly succinct posting, many interesting and reflected thoughts expressed.  I agree in general with you ... criticisms shall we say ? of the general concept of authorizations. Certification of some skill set or another does indeed have built in weaknesses.  My general feelings however tell me that the alternative is in the end even worse. One thing about even the most reasonable form of certification... it in any case removes any form of excuse the certified individual has for not doing a defensibly professionals job. As it is... pure and total slop, if not down right fraudulence is from a legal standpoint ...well perfectly acceptable to sharpen the point a bit.  The buyer beware market in the end becomes too complicated, too frustrating and in the end by necessity will die upon its own unworkableness... tho to be sure it will survive some time yet. At least that is my take.  I base this on the firm believe that in the end only honesty and a willingess to do that little extra for what one is being paid for will in the end provide any real and lasting form of <<profit>>... and that profit is not, and can not be limited to a concept involving exclusively material gain.  All of which lies at the root of my present querrie  It is bad enough me thinks that one may be authorized in some skills set and not live up to the requirements that authorization implies and imposes.... It is entirely another thing to clearly misrepresent what authorization one actually has. We hear from time to time of folks who misuse the PTG logo and titles, and rightly so we are alarmed and take issue.  I am suprised sometimes by the fact that there is often an uproar over certain apparent breaches of this and similar relevant issues whilst the same collective we sits by calmly and reacts with total complacency over blatant breaches of patent laws in using trademarks one has no legal rights to use, using other products names after severe modifications to these products... etc and the like.  I do not manage despite my best efforts to find any semblance of coherency in the moralizations expressed.  And this applies to just about any branch, any grouping, any market. The written <<rules>> seem to be a rouge for whatever foul play one can get away with under guise... as long as one manages to remain under guise.  All is fair as long as one is not exposed as it were.... much in the same sense you describe below. I find it all... disappointing at best.  In the end... all these transgresions are motivated by some idea that one will gain some form of fame, power, prestisje... what have you... and that is all so very much an absurdly falsehood... an illusion. Playing honest will afford anyone all the material needs and more one ever needs.  The rest will dissapear as quickly (if not quicker) then is appears in the first place... because these things are built on false premises. To put it this way... an individual who has to buy his friends will lose them at the first hint his money has been used up. Grin... I ramble as I sometimes do... btw... got your private epost a bit back and simply have been swamped with work. The Bluthner project goes well, and I will be stringing up in October.  It has taken me very much time because of the fact that I am not primarilly a rebuilder but concentrate my efforts in concert prep and tunings around Norway, and because I have used very much time trying to pump information from a world of techs who are far less willing to share their knowledge then many would have it apparent. Old world trade secrecy is alive and well... and to my mind of thinking just as counter productive as it ever was. Cheers RicB <blockquote> Hi Ric, hi list. Ric, as always, I like your view which is very pertinent to my eyes. Just a few thoughts from poor me who has no (I mean really not one) authorized qualification in any way, piano related or not.  The emphasis is of course on the word authorized. The concept of authorizing per se is not bad for me, in the way that it gives to the authorized person well just that, authority to act in his branche, that is controlled pertinence.  Normally, one should trust the authorized guy and be confident in the level of his skills. Now what are skills ?  Sorry to say, in my life, every authorizing process I encountered proved to be just (and no more than) favoring the skills of the pupils to please the "masters" who give the authorization, whatever this involves.  No doubt, of course, that some of the true skills are implied, but then again, what are the true skills ? Can we talk about tradition ?  Ow, wrong word in here.  Anyway, even out of here, one must see that tradition is not anymore what it used to be, that is in the times when the words master and apprentice had their full meaning. So ok, let's forget about tradition, which is anyway like glue under our feet. Let's be more pragmatic.  What is a good scale ?  Reading this list, none of the scales from the past would succeed in authorizing their finders.  Many will point out that those scales don't obey to what they think is a good scale, that is mainly (so I suppose) one that makes all curves alla Dave Roberts (with or without Sanderson's corrections) smooth.  This alone proves that a part of the tradition that used to give different colours to different registers disappeared.  What didn't disappear is the gold medal for the guy who says that a good scale is etc. whatever if it matches what the master thinks. What is a good rim ?  Well any from 1850 uptill now seems to do well enough, so ... What is a good pinblock ? Well any from ever seems to fail at some point, so ... When are you rim or pinblock bauer authorized ?  Well depends on who makes the authorization and on how well he likes you. What is a good voicing ?  Well, for me, I have a few tests that I try on the pianos I voice.  One of my favourite is just playing the "Adagio cantabile" from the "Grande sonate pathetique" Opus 13 of Beethoven, and see how well I succeed in having the melody sing clearly while the accompanying stays on the background forming a comfortable seat for the melody to sit in.  I know that if this works well, many things in the repertoire will work well, and pianists will be happy.  Now if I were a "master", I would not authorize any of my "apprentices" unless they are able to do this check, that is play the Adagio cantabile of Beethoven sonata op. 13 in a precise way enough to get clear conscience that the piano will work for fine playing.  Is this involved in the German klavierbaumeister process ?  Don't know.  But I know many authorized voicers are only after maximum power. Now back on topic, the employment thing.  Again in my life, what I saw is that authorization has proved to be most beneficial when applying for a job in an authorized structure.  Everywhere else, competence and good fame do the trick. Best regards. Stéphane Collin. </blockquote> </body> </html>