CAUT Guidelines

[Fred Sturm]

I agree with the basic concept: avoid keeping everything just barely
livable, or everyone will assume the situation is just fine, even as it
slowly deteriorates. So it is best to allow noticeable deterioration to
occur. But another element is extremely important. Communication. People
have to know what is happening.
	I suggest getting appropriate faculty involved. Probably this is the
piano/keyboard faculty. Ask them to help you set priorities. Guide the
process with suggestions: "Obviously we need to make the perfomance
instrument(s) top priority. I would suggest the following list of
faculty studios, classrooms, practice rooms as an order of priority to
follow thereafter." Then tour the facility, having them play each
instrument. You'd be amazed how few faculty have any idea where the
practice rooms are, let alone the condition of the pianos.
	If you then come up with a list of what to rebuild, what to
recondition, etc. in some kind of order, you can report back that the
following is what will get done this year, so much next year, etc. Or we
can make some hard choices, tune the following pianos one time less a
year, etc., and do a little more rehabilitation work. (And maybe someone
can come up with some purchase money for new instruments).
	The point is to raise awareness among faculty, make it THEIR aim to
lobby for improvements, in competition with other faculty who are
lobbying for more money to rent parts, buy marimbas, attend conferences,
etc. And to make sure they are buying into the notion of improving some
instruments, knowing that others will suffer.

Just my two to maybe two and a half cents worth. If only my keyboard
faculty will stop turning over so fast, so I don't have to start over so
often! Not to mention chairs.
Fred Sturm
University of New Mexico

Ken Eschete wrote:
> 
> To All:
> 
> Faced with the situation of having too many pianos and not enough technical
> staff, there are two options:
> 1)  The technicians can try to do the best they can to keep all the pianos
> going.  Like tuning an equal temperment, they shave a little maintenance
> time off of each piano and hope that nothing really sticks out.
>   2.) The other option is like tuning a Pythagorian temperment, where no
> maintenance time is shaved off of the more important pianos, and the
> effects of not having a large enough staff are concentrated into a section
> of the inventory (the Wolf). Some of the pianos are really, really good,
> and some are really, really, really bad, making it quite clear why a larger
> staff is needed.
> 
> Demonstrate what IS NOT getting done due to a lack of staff so that
> everyone can HEAR the difference.  Figure out how much NOT doing
> maintenance work is costing the University.  (Example -- an old Steinway B
> in good playing condition is worth say $20,000.00.  Once it is allowed to
> fall into un-playable condition, it is only worth $7,000.00.  Not doing the
> work will cost the University $13,000.00 in equity.  Doing the work with
> in-house staff will cost them about $5,000.00 but that  will still raise
> the net equity value of the piano by $8,000.00.  Then we can talk about
> replacing that Steinway, but don't get me started.....
> 
> The Steinway and CAUT Guidelines are useful tools; but in the end, I think
> it's the money that talks.  This is how I'm going to try it.  I'll let you
> all know if it works for me.
> 
> Ken Eschete
> Northwestern University
> Evanston, Il
>