On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 21:43:47 -050 Ron Nossaman wrote (in response to Mike Magness): >> IMHO Israel Stein's letter on how people learn or don't learn and why was rather illuminating and apropos to this discussion. > > That would be the one in where I was personally condemned for not accepting the status quo of the Steinway sostenuto system, and presuming to change it rather than just learning to deal with it? Actually what you were accused of is refusing to take seriously the objections of those of us who actually like the action-mounted sostenuto. When you have to make a quick damper repair in a rush (like in concert situations or in some professional/institutional settings) - that belly mounted sostenoto really does get in the way and takes up time one might not have...But you highandedly dismissed those objections because - from your perspective - it is an improvement. Which is what the rest of my post was about. (For your information, it takes me about as much time to regulate an action mounted sostenuto as a belly mounted one - so I don't need your "improved" sostenuto - and it does get in my way when I have to work on the Hamburg Steinway dampers. Or Yamaha or any of the others). If you look at it from another perspective, how often does one need to regulate a sostenuto vs. how often would one need to get to the damper underlevers for a, say, action center problem (especially in some environments?) What would be a greater priority for an institutional technician? As a matter of fact, according to Eric Schandall Steinway NY has been considering the idea of moving the sostenuto to the belly - and it always meets with fierce opposition from the concert technicians. They dread the day that Steinway succumbs to pressure from technicians who won't learn how to regulate an action mounted sostenuto (which is very simple - once you learn how - no harder than the belly-mounted kind ). There are issues to discuss here, and priorities to be balanced - so there is no reason to dismiss those who disagree with you as those who "accept the status quo of the Steinway sostenuto system". There are good reasons for maintaining them, from some perspectives. > And being ignorant of the give and take of the formal educational process, having acquired my apparently sub standard education outside an institutional setting? No. Just a lack of respect for approaches other than your own... > And being myopic in my inability to understand the value of knowledge acquired from others in a give and take instructor/student setting? I think your original message reeks of that attitude - where you dismiss knowledge acquired in institutional settings in a rather jaundiced peroration... I took it as an attack on all those who attempt to teach and learn in that manner - and tried to give you a taste of your own medicine. How does it feel to be painted with a broad brush? > And screwing up pianos for years as a result of lacking competent instruction, again, presumably in an institutional setting? That remark was aimed not at you personally - but at the customary way in which an awful lot of technicians gain their knowledge. Perhaps you only screwed up pianos for a few months. Or perhaps you got it right on the first try - I mean you are a pretty smart guy... Or did someone show you how? > And one of the worst among the "self taught" in suffering from the lack of varied perspective of others, universalizing my own miserable experience, as a result of being unwilling to listen to anyone else? The operative word there was "perhaps"... > You mean that illuminating missive, with the comments of both parties being attributed to Mr Stein by virtue of lack of differentiation within the text, and the absence of my own signature and credit for my own comments? I believe I took pains to correct that... Israel Stein
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC