Valid concern for sure. The 10 Commandments approach tends to work well, except maybe in this case the commandment should be "oily lubricants nowhere where they can reach wood and felt" instead of "WD-40 nowhere near piano"? Because the binary technician could likewise pour CLP down tuning pins, smear tuning pins with Super Lube, dab Super Lube on key bushings, and spread teflon powder all over key tops (seen all of those).
My perspective is, it's been a long day and they are out there looking around for the first thing to grab to solve the problem. The recommended solution is not available and past experience is used for guidance. If the tech is thinking, "WD-40 has always worked for me on metal, why wouldn't I use it on the plate," a "never ever on the piano" statement is less productive than "never if it can reach wood." If I need to unscrew an agraffe from a rusty plate or unfreeze a stuck caster, and the only thing in sight is WD-40, I'd rather know that a judicious application of it is OK, whereas if a plate screw is stuck, it is not.
-------------------------------------------
Mario Igrec
http://www.pianosinsideout.com -------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------- Original Message:
Sent: 11-14-2013 11:10
From: Ronald Nossaman
Subject: Lubricating Strings at Bearing Points
On 11/14/2013 9:25 AM, Mario Igrec wrote:
> Advocating, no; defending, yes because what I hear is that it will
> "damage the piano." That hasn't been my experience. Having said that,
> please nobody allow it to get anywhere near wood, and yes, it will
> gunk up and attract dust and dirt. It will also protect metal from
> corrosion, but there may be better alternatives.
Okay. A good illustration of the problem. I've never heard anyone say it
will "damage the piano". They say it creeps, gums up, screws up wood,
etc, and that there are better alternatives (already noted). Any number
of details and caveats spoken on the use of WD-40 in pianos (or any
other topic, in my experience) gets immediately reduced to a binary
yes/no, good/bad, no matter what was actually said. As in, "damage the
piano", where using it in agraffe installation, though unnecessary, is
harmless if it's sensibly controlled. What is retained is, it's okay to
use it in pianos. So and so said so. When, in fact, so and so extended
all sorts of dire warnings and cautions, with specific conditions for
the use mentioned. But that doesn't fit in the binary judgement plan, so
everything but "it's okay" is stripped off and, hey, we can use it on
everything! The ONLY safe approach is a general discouragement to using
WD-40 in pianos in any manner whatsoever. It fits the binary assessment,
and doesn't require the understanding of finer points, such as
differentiating between metals, wood, felt, finish, or whatever. Also,
there are better choices that have proven over time to be less
potentially harmful in the hands of the binary assessment techs without
fine point understanding (who are legion). It's like the global drive to
eradicate smallpox. The only way to be rid of it is to make it extinct.
I know, there are cans of WD-40 in the freezers of the CDC next to the
smallpox, awaiting their chance to escape back into the wild, but we can
at least make an attempt to minimize the damage by discouraging use of
the product in pianos. I use the same criteria in determining my own
usage of specific products. Instead of approaching it as, this should be
okay if.. if.. if.., and/or if.., I start with down sides. If I can see
no potential disasters, either in what I'm doing, or in what someone
watching will hallucinate, I'm probably fine except that I can't
possibly anticipate what the other guy will make of it, or anything
else. It's about minimizing losses.
Ron N