This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment I must certainly agree with everyone that partial approaches have value = but for the customer to realize the most enjoyment from the piano I = stand by my statement that rebuilding is best. And the more extensive = the better. Of course inspect carefully and save what is salvagable but = despite what Tim Coates ( and you know I'm on your side brother) says = and what John Koster's stories may indicate I can tell you stories of = complete restorations that are very successful. So really it comes down = to your customer's needs and you have given very little info about the = customer. As I'm sure we all try and tune our customers we also should = restore or rebuild our customers. So Stephen what kind of customer is = this anyway? A museum that will attract the out-of-towners looking for = novelty? The stay at home only gona play hymns on Sundays? A wise = investor looking to maintain resale value? Then we can talk. And just so I can get my story in: I service a "transitional" design = Steinway nearby and it was pruchased from Steinway around 1915. Prior to = that it was used for the concert "bank" and was brought in for design = updates at least 3 times between construction and sale to the public. = This is not anecdotal but common practice. Clearly Steinway thinks a = "good playing" instrument is an updated one. I may as well take this opportunity to come out of the closet and = reveal my bias, actually a pet peave, just to be fair. In case anyone = wasn't catching the drift, I have almost no use for historical = instruments. I can't imagine any musician of the day, say Franz Liszt, = looking for "the good old piano." Most often professional pianists, = unless they are looking for novelty, or are overcome with this absurd = nostalgia for "original instruments," look for the best new piano they = can find. 'Cause the design is up to date and the parts are new and it = plays like they expect. Everything else is ANOMALY. And unless your = customer is of that ilk I'd stick to I-95. (I do make one notable = exception and that is reproductions. They make for wonderful = "Historical" concerts although I do think the whole concept is a bit = hysterical). Of course Stephen, be attentive to what Bill Shull and = others are warning of cause this isn't I-95, but get as close as you can = and a "NORMAL" customer will be happy. And BTW, sorry Bill, we're full = at MARC and printed for this year, but I have forwarded your shameless = self invitation to Steve and Paul and will put in a good word for you. Best to All, Chris Solliday =20 ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Stephen Snyder=20 To: 'College and University Technicians'=20 Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2005 7:08 PM Subject: [CAUT] Steinway Style II Grand Dear Friends, I have a customer with a Steinway Style II grand. This was in = production for a couple of years between 1872 and 1873 before the = introduction of the Steinway B. I hope some of you are familiar with = this piano. This piano appears to be in original condition , but is in = need of restoration/ preservation. I'm looking for feedback on whether = it would be best to restore the piano -new soundboard, pinblock,bridge = caps action parts.etc. or preserve the the piano using as many of the = original components as possible? I realize there will be no clear cut = answer, but given the historic/antique nature of the instrument your = thoughts will be appreciated. Regards, Steve Stephen Snyder Registered Piano Technician 342 Scotts Lake Road Salem, NY 12865 518-854-3888 e-mail: shsnyder@sover.net ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/caut.php/attachments/99/63/43/ad/attachment.htm ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC