More thoughts WAS Re: Master Piano Tuner

[David Porritt]

Greg:

I think the issue with your customers who wanted a PTG member (RPT?) is their honest
view that they didn't have the knowledge to determine your skill level.  If you have
certain credentials, that substitutes for their inability to discern your
skills....much like I look for "CPA" when I hunt for an accountant.  I just assume
there is some competence there that I have no idea how to discover for myself.

dave


Gregory Torres wrote:

> Then it really shouldn't matter if we belong to one group or another does it? If
> we strive to learn more and more and just do quality work then that would be all
> the assurance a customer would need, right?
>
> I hope my questions and statements have not let anyone think I am putting down
> either organization because I am not. But to imply that a technician that is a
> member is automatically better than one who isn't or that it assures the customer
> of quality work may not be totally fair either.
>
> There have been a couple times when I did get a little irritated with customers
> who would not let me tune their piano after I was asked if I was a member of the
> guild and replied I wasn't.
>
> But the bottom line for me is as long as I continue to do quality work then it
> doesn't matter if I am a member of either organization. The word of mouth
> ultimately prevails.
>
> Sincerely,
> Greg Torres
>
> PDtek wrote:
>
> > In a message dated 98-05-19 20:45:29 EDT, you write:
> >
> > > I guess you answered some of my questions. But would you say that by being
> > >  tested by PTG and passing is better than just joining an organization such
> > > as
> > >  the one we are talking about?
> > >
> >
> > About 10 years ago while attending a PTG convention, I took a class entitled
> > "How to Pass the RTT Exams". The instructor, (I apologize, I do not remember
> > his name) took his exams back when the technical part of the exam was written
> > only with nothing "hands on". He said that with virtually no experience in
> > working with pianos, he studied one evening and then passed the exam the next
> > day. At this very convention, there was a vote taken as to whether the RPTs
> > that had taken the earlier (easier) exams should be required to take the new
> > hands on exams in order to keep their RPT status. This idea was voted down.
> >
> > Now it seems to me that anyone who is able to pass an exam in this way without
> > ever laying hands on a piano has no right to pass themselves off as qualified
> > to competently work on pianos, and a customer has no way of knowing who has
> > passed the more stringent tests. Now, I admit that I have not kept track of
> > guild polocies since then. Have all RPTs taken and passed the most recent test
> > procedures? If not, doesn't this state of affairs greatly dilute the RPT
> > status?
> >
> > If I remember correctly, when the "new testing" proposal was voted down, the
> > reason given was that if these "old testing" techs had been in business all
> > this time, then we could safely assume that their skills were up to speed. In
> > other words, the same philosophy that is used by the Master Piano Technicians
> > of America.
> >
> > Dave Bunch



_______________________________________________

David M. Porritt, RPT
Meadows School of the Arts
Southern Methodist University
Dallas, Texas
_______________________________________________