<HTML>In a message dated 6/3/2003 10:58:16 AM Pacific Standa= rd Time, joegarrett@earthlink.net writes: <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT= : 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Do they want us to "Re-what-eve= r" any of their pianos? Not no, Hell no! (and this applies to all manufacturers) They are in the business to make/sell pianos. The more that are condemmed and trashed, the happier they<= BR> will be.</BLOCKQUOTE> That was true some years back. I have heard it from the Lips of Bigwigs. I h= ave had a number of conversations with said Bigwigs, pointing out the short-= sightedness of such a policy, and I'm not the only one. Such a policy assume= s that there is room for a fixed number of [insert make here], which is just= not true. There is an expanding population base, at their best they are sti= ll competitive at the highest musical levels, and they are made in very limi= ted numbers. The factory itself rebuilds 300 Steinways a year. Well-rebuilt Steinways enh= ance their reputation for longevity of performance, and make even the new on= es more desirable. One reasonable objection the company had in the past was = that they had no control over the quality of rebuilding "out there," and the= re was much re-whatevering that did not even come CLOSE to factory standards= . They felt that this did not represent the marque well. This is one reason = for the expansion of their educational programs. I think there is a lot more= rebuilding and service out there now that meets or exceeds those standards = (although still not everywhere), and I have even seen suggestions from field= technicians taken back to the factory to go into production instruments.<BR= > I don't agree that the factory is cavalier. I mildly or seriously disagree w= ith them on occasion like everyone else, but I can't tell you the amount of = invaluable, cheerful help they have given me. It's true they are slow to cha= nge, but there are reasons for this, some good and some bad. Their reluctanc= e to change does not necessarily equal deaf-eared stonewalling. I don't thin= k we owe them reverence, but a certain amount of respect for what they have = accomplished, and are trying to accomplish, is reasonable, and certainly con= ducive to two-way conversation. I think that even their choice of Directors = of Education (Scott Jones, John Patton, Eric Schandall) speaks volumes about= the factory's desire to communicate with us in the field. I have the highes= t regard for their technical ability, but more important, their friendly att= itude and obvious ability, and desire, to teach. I don't intend to stop criticizing the factory, but the larger my skill set = becomes, the more respect, rather than less, I have for them. Bob D </HTML>