[CAUT] Steinway D Belly Work

[David Skolnik]

Denis -
With all due respect, what, exactly, are you expecting in response to 
this question?  Yes, it seems reasonable  to ask whether Restoration 
handles belly work the same way as the factory does.  You 
could/should pose that question directly to Steinway.  Ask what the 
differences are?  Press?  Belly man?  Then, assuming you believe what 
you are told (I'm not saying there's any reason to believe 
otherwise), you have your answer.  You still might want to explain 
your thinking, or that of your institutional client, more 
fully.  What is it you assume/believe about having this work done by 
anyone OTHER than Restoration?  Results?  Market 
value?  Institutional politics?

You close with saying that you value peoples opinions.  The 
methodology employed by Restoration would not be a matter of 
opinion.  What would be, however, would be peoples preferences or 
perception of results, and I doubt you would gain much useful 
perspective along those lines in this open forum.   The ability to 
provide a positive endorsement is a far simpler matter than the alternative.

David Skolnik
Hastings on Hudson, NY

At 06:34 PM 12/16/2011, you wrote:
>List,
>
>I have been given the green light to have on of our Steinway D's 
>rebuilt.  We are not going to refinish the piano at this time.
>
>Steinway's methodology in doing the belly is important to me, so I 
>would like to know if any of you CAUT technicians have sent your 
>belly work to the Steinway Restoration Center, and if so, would you 
>care to comment on the job done.
>
>Do they do the EXACT same methods in the factory as they do the 
>Restoration Center?
>
>I know that New York charges the highest price that I know of, but 
>in my situation the money is there if that is the decision I make.
>
>I value all of your opinions greatly.  Any comments would be helpful.
>
>Sincerely,
>Denis Ikeler

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/caut.php/attachments/20111216/025d40d1/attachment.htm>