<HTML>In a message dated 12/4/00 8:48:37 AM Central Standard Time, cedel@supernet.com (Clyde Hollinger) writes: <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">That positive note helped to balance out the negative feelings I had developed over the past couple years toward the model.  I found the one I service very susceptible to humidity changes.  I convinced the church to install a humidity control system.  That, together with using an electronic tuning device (RCT) that shows me right away if the tension is holding or not, has me optimistic that I can keep the piano sounding reasonably good with six-month tunings. Regards, Clyde   <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Hi,Send em my way!Yous guys must be usin' the wrong hammer Technique ot sumthin. <G></XMP></BLOCKQUOTE> </BLOCKQUOTE> It always seems that this model of piano brings on a heated discussion.  I remember years ago people complaining about the tuning difficulty but personally, I never give it much thought and indeed, find myself agreeing with Joe Goss for once.  I use a Wonderwand tuning hammer (the one with the ball handle) and keep it at 2-3 o'clock, using an impact type technique.   Yes, it does tune differently from other pianos but once having accepted that, I consider the difference itself to be fairly insignificant. They do have a good tone and if properly regulated, have a good touch but I also feel that for the money spent, there is a better choice.  In the ideal world, every piano would be kept up to specs at all times and if it were up to me, they would be.  However, I know the world is not ideal and I vividly recall a visit to a university last year where nearly all of the pianos were Steinways and all but one vertical was a Steinway.  Unfortunately, I have never seen such a bunch of ragged, abused, neglected and miserable looking Steinways in my life! The attitude about them was one that I have fought my entire career:  "Aw, they're just the uprights, ya justoon'em."  So, the tuning difficulty aside, the difficulty of maintaining good alignment, regulation and voicing only multiplied the maintenance problems tenfold.  But you can be sure that this institution was still so very proud of all of its Steinways. I like it when I can reply to two or three posts at once.  The reason I think that such a school would do so much better with Kawai verticals is, you guessed it, "Plastic" (ABS) parts.  If the "too-busy-to-be-bothered-with-uprights" techs are going to ignore the mechanical maintenance of these instruments and complain about how difficult they are to tune anyway, why buy them?  Why not buy a piano that needs very little correction over the years and is not nearly as affected by humidity changes (as far as regulation goes)? Have you ever tried to align the hammers on an older Steinway vertical with the double hammer/damper flanges?  Now *there* is a real challenge!  In my opinion, the more that manufacturers move towards synthetic moving parts for piano actions in the future, the better.  Steinway would do well to take this hint from its business partner, Kawai who manufactures its Boston pianos.   I'd like to see replacement parts made for rebuilding older Steinways, both grand and vertical made from ABS plastic. Bill Bremmer RPT Madison, Wisconsin</HTML>