Guidelines Question

[Fred Sturm]

Avery,
	There were some fairly important changes made between the initial draft
of a year ago and the latest formula. It sound like you were using the
template currently posted on the CAUT page, which contains the earliest
version. I agree the calculated workload sounds very low for your
situation. I think the revisions will change it significantly, and in
the "right" direction, with considerably better reflection of workload
generated by individual pianos. New templates with the latest (and
probably final) figures should be up in the next couple months, and
we'll announce that on the list when it happens.
	The current/final factors for Condition, Rebuilding Parameters
(replaces Quality), Climate Control, Usage, Upright/grand, and Standard
of Maintenance (replaces Acceptable Standards) - all of which had very
significant changes - are pasted below. It is possible to enter these
numbers in the same templates - you just have to type them in, rather
than use the pull-down menus.
	Hope this clarifies things. I'm sorry for the confusion caused by
several versions circulating simultaneously. Let me know if you have
further questions. And let us know how it calculates out.
Regards,
Fred Sturm
University of New Mexico

Condition
(1.3) - Excellent: Piano needs regular maintenance - regulation, tuning
and voicing.
(1.0) - Good: Piano needs some minor reconditioning - hammer filing, key
bushing, minor action pinning, regulation, tuning, voicing.
(0.8) - Good/Fair: Piano needs major reconditioning - hammer
replacement, major action repinning, key re-bushing, regulation, tuning,
voicing.
(0.6) - Fair: Piano needs partial rebuilding - new hammers and other
action parts, restringing with existing pinblock, regulation, tuning and
voicing.
(0.4) - Fair/Poor: Piano needs major rebuilding - new pin block,
soundboard repair, new strings, tuning pins, action parts, regulation,
tuning and voicing.
(0.2) - Poor: Piano needs complete rebuild/remanufacture - new
soundboard and bridges, pin block, new strings, tuning pins, action
parts, regulation, tuning and voicing.
[Note: Categories Fair through Poor should only be applied to pianos
that will receive the described level of work.]

Rebuilding Parameters
(0.4) Piano will receive complete rebuilding/remanufacturing, including
new soundboard and bridges, and possibly new keyboard.
(0.6) Piano will receive major rebuilding, including soundboard repair
and new pinblock.
(0.8) Piano will receive minor rebuilding, including restring with
original pinblock, complete action parts replacement.
(1.0) Piano will receive major reconditioning, including new hammers and
possibly shanks/butts, major repinning.
(1.2) Piano will receive minor reconditioning, filing hammers, rebushing
keys, regulation.
[Note:  Each category represents the maximum rebuilding/reconditioning
care the individual piano will receive. These parameters are expected to
apply over the life of the piano, and to apply to work done at the
institution.]

Climate Control
1.4 - Excellent: 5% maximum variance in relative humidity (generally
achievable only with complete humidity control unit installed and
well-maintained, with back covers on uprights, string and bottom covers
on grands; and with ambiant humidity within 20%)
1.2 - Very good: 10% maximum variance in relative humidity (or has
complete humidity control unit installed and well-maintained, with back
covers on uprights, string and bottom covers on grands)
1.0 - Good: 25% maximum variance in relative humidity (or has complete
humidity control unit installed and well-maintained)
0.8 - Fair: 40% maximum variance in relative humidity
0.6 - Poor: 60% maximum variance in relative humidity
0.4 - Very Poor: variance in excess of 60%

Usage
(2.0) - 0 to 4 hours - light usage
(1.7) - 4 to 8 hours - light usage
(1.3) - 8 or more hours - light usage
(1.3) - 0 to 4 hours - medium usage
(1.0) - 4 to 8 hours - medium usage
(0.7) - 8 or more hours - medium usage
(0.8) - 0 to 4 hours - heavy usage
(0.6) - 4 to 8 hours - heavy usage
(0.4) - 8 to 12 hours - heavy usage
(0.3) - more than 12 hours heavy usage
[Note: Heavy usage is generally what would be found in piano major
practice rooms, piano faculty studios, and heavy use recital/rehearsal
halls. Medium usage is similar to what would be found in most voice
studios. Some discretion must be used for those pianos that get a wide
variety of levels of use.]

Upright or Grand
(1.1) - Upright
(0.7) - Grand

Standard of Maintenance 
(0.1) - Top performance: Piano is maintained in meticulous condition at
all times: tuning, voicing, and regulation at highest possible standard,
with daily or near daily attention; rebuilding and reconditioning on an
accelerated schedule so that piano is kept virtually "like new."
(Generally concert instruments in recital hall)
(0.4) - Near top performance: Piano maintained as above, but with weekly
to twice-weekly attention, and somewhat slacker rebuilding schedule.
(Generally piano teaching studios and the like. In some situations may
apply to concert instruments).
(0.7) - Excellent: Piano kept near performance level - well tuned,
voiced, and regulated. Weekly to bi-weekly attention. Rebuilding and
reconditioning on a regular basis.
(1.0) - Very good: Piano kept at an acceptable musical level - tuned,
voiced and regulated on a regular basis. Bi-weekly to monthly attention.
Reconditioned on a regular basis.
(1.3) - Good: Piano kept at an acceptable musical level - tuned, voiced
and regulated on a regular basis. Monthly to bi-monthly attention.
Reconditioned on a regular basis.
(1.8) - Fair: Piano kept at an acceptable musical level - tuning allowed
to deteriorate before retuning, voicing and regulation kept at
acceptable levels. Once to twice a semester attention.
(2.5) - Minimum: piano tuned twice a year; all keys "working." 
Avery Todd wrote:
> 
> Fred and List,
> 
> Hope everyone enjoyed the convention and learned a lot. Since I
> wasn't able to go this year, I decided to use some time (finally)
> to enter the data into the CAUT Guidelines thing.
> 
> For those of you who have done this, I have a question.
> 
> After entering everything, the techs needed came to 1.125, using
> the box totals on the side of the Excel worksheet. Considering
> the number of pianos (133), the condition of about 20 Steinway
> L's and a few Yamaha (most all 1970's) and our recital/performance
> load, I'm sure that number should be higher.
> 
> I think the reason it came out this way is because in the Condition
> category, I put the 1970's Steinways and Yamahas in the Fair
> category because I feel they don't need a new soundboard yet. Or
> even a new pin block in most instances. However, they do need
> everything else, including restringing.
> 
> My question is should I change all those into the poor category
> since that's the only place where restringing is mentioned?
> 
> What are your thoughts/suggestions about this? Thanks.
> 
> Avery
> University of Houston