[CAUT] Re 1/4 Tone Sharp

[Wolfley, Eric (wolfleel)]

Thanks Jim,

I'm sorry I mis-remembered the results of your visit here in regards to
the broken plate. In the case of responsibility here, I don't think
anybody would blame me if the piano broke and I certainly wouldn't be
doing any of this work to a valuable quality instrument. This little
Baldwin M has been used here for the past few years as the "sacrificial"
piano for these types of uses. It still lives.

Eric Wolfley, RPT
Head Piano Technician
Cincinnati College-Conservatory of Music
University of Cincinnati

-----Original Message-----
From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of
James Ellis
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:19 PM
To: caut at ptg.org
Subject: [CAUT] Re 1/4 Tone Sharp

Eric Wolfley mentioned my coming to Cincinnati in regard to litigation
over
a broken plate.  Yes, I remember.  It was a very pretty piano, but one
that
was out of warranty, and one whose maker had since gone out of business.
But those circumstances were entirely different from the one discussed
here.  In that case, it was a pirch raise following the procedures many
technicians now use.  The problem arose when one area technician claimed
that the plate broke because the technician did not raise the pitch in
small increments over an extended period of time instead of all at once.
The tiny-small-increment philosophy had it's day many decades ago, and
has
since been proven to be nonsense, but that was the basis of the law
suit.

The facts were something completely different.  I examined how the plate
was made, and how it broke.  After I came back home and did an analysis,
I
concluced that I did not understand why the plate had not broken when it
was first brought up to pitch at the factory.  One man who had worked at
that factory said that as a matter of fact, the plates of some of those
models did break at the factory when they were brought up to pitch.  I
was
told that the law suit was dropped less than 24 hours before it was to
be
heard in court.

The current discussion is about something entirely different.  The piano
in
question might do just fine, but again, it's possible that it might not.
If I were the technician, I would handle it the easy way.  I would
simply
say that I did not recommend it, but that I would to it if the
institution
insisted, and if I did, I would NOT accept ANY responsibility WHATSOEVER
for ANY damages that might occur as a result.  I would accept NONE of
the
risk, if any.

Personally, I think it's absurd that someone writes "music" that must be
played on an instrument that's tuned outside of its normal range.  This,
in
my opinion, is nonsense - "The Emperor's New Clothes", etc.

I hope this helps.  Sincerely, Jim Ellis