[pianotech] NY Times article on pianos

[tnrwim at aol.com]

Joe

Even in the "grand old days" of piano making, there were top of the line, middle of the road and "entry" level pianos. Most technicians, much less the general public, can't tell the difference. Unfortunately , most of those technicians who think they can fix anything, will convince a customer to spend thousands of dollars to "rebuild" one of those old clunkers only to wind up with an expensive pile of junk that might last another 10 or 20 years.

Only on rare occasions is it worth rebuilding an old piano. But for the most part, money is better spent on a new, or slightly used, piano, even some that are made in Asia. 

Wim

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 30, 2012, at 9:28 AM, "Joseph Garrett" <joegarrett at earthlink.net> wrote:

> David Love said: 
> "Buying a piano has never been a good "investment", not monetarily. Well,
> except maybe when the rate of inflation hits 20 percent. At least then it
> makes it seem like one. Once you drive them off the lot..."
> 
> Define "investment".<G> If you are looking at it, strickly, from a
> financial standpoint, I'll give you that. However, you cannot put a $ sign
> on sheer aesthetic beauty of the furniture designs, the musical beauty, and
> the longevity. Name one thing, other than a house, that continues to last
> as long, with minimum amount of $ for maintainence? There is none, imo.
> (not even the $ invested in your kids!<G>) Not to mention the establisment
> of learning music, scholastic achievement, mental stability, (all of which
> have been written up in medical journals and such), and a sense of value in
> those things of years gone by. As for the dollar values that you put on
> "rebuilding"? Everyone needs to realize that you are quoting California
> prices, which are unlike any other part of the world.<G>
> That's my take on that.
> Joe
> 
> 
> Joe Garrett, R.P.T.
> Captain of the Tool Police
> Squares R I
>