I have no reports/documentation, etc., but I do have a church and a school that have told me that it's less expensive, for them, to bring me in as needed, sometimes monthly, than it is to maintain a constant environment in the buildings the pianos live in.
For the church, after I had the Steinway D rebuilt for the very large main worship center, and knowing that stability had always been a problem, we had them invest in a heavy piano cover that went clear down to the floor and installed a full dampp-chaser system. All of this in an effort to accommodate the sporadic use of the AC and attempt to keep the piano happy and reduce my service calls for tuning. The power cord to the dampp-chaser was broken so many times by people that should not have been moving the piano in the first place that I finally removed the whole thing and installed it on another needy piano in the same building. After a surprisingly short time they actually gave the high end cover away because it was too hard for them to take off and then put back on. That's about the time the conversation about frequency of service vs environmental control came up and I was told that "the board" decided I was the least expensive of the two. I now stay quiet and am happy to provide very frequent service to them, (and three pianos), and they are always glad to see me.
A large community college that I provide service for, had two new art buildings built. In the one that housed the music and dance department, and the recital hall, they actually installed a controlled environment storage room just behind the stage for the relatively new Yamaha C7 and an older G7. Had it's own system including thermostat, AND humidity control built in. The AC for that room was supposed to send controlled moisture into the vents that serviced that room when it got too dry. Real professional job. Except the system was never completed and what was actually in there never actually worked right, they tell me. Also, nobody was ever shown how to actually use it so they were afraid of it. Once again, "the board" deemed it more economical to bring me in frequently than to correct the problem. Again, they're always glad to see me.
(later) - I realize I forgot to actually make my point, and that is that most non high profile bean counters are seldom able to see long term financial value of this kind of care, nor the value of the instrument itself. They are more interested in keeping expenses and the budget within the available funds they have at their disposal today. Long term budget planning probably rarely goes beyond the next budget review cycle. The church manages to allow a budget for my services that, with care, we can usually make last for an entire year. The school provides a budget that is actually only good for about four or five months, once a year. And at the end of that period we've always used up the entire budget save $20 or $30. After that they know that the practice rooms have to stay where they are and that recitals have to get put off. Their investment in the instruments, and the potential future need for repairs, or replacement, just never becomes part of the discussion. I'm sure my two examples are not unique.
------------------------------
Geoff Sykes, RPT
Los Angeles CA
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 09-08-2022 20:35
From: Sheffey Gregory
Subject: temperature control in churches
Does anyone have actual reports/documentation/surveys etc. which show the benefits of maintaining a consistent temperature in a building? How this is actually -LESS- expensive than turning the system on and off. I've had people tell me this, from their personal experience, but no documentation. Please share if you do. Thanks!
------------------------------
Sheffey Gregory, RPT
------------------------------