Tim: I know posts from me have irritated you in the past so I'll try my best not to do that with this one. When someone invents something that they deem to be significant, application is made for a patent. In the patent process "claims" are made. If the patent office decides that these claims are novel, not obvious, and not "prior art" a patent is awarded. At that time the claims are made public and the intellectual property is protected for a length of time. At this point outsiders can evaluate the claims in the patent and question them. The inventor/patent-holder must then defend their claims. Once a patent has been made public the inventor can expect questions from the relevant community about his/her work. The old playground "because I said so" doesn't suffice. Questions, requests for scientific (repeatable) test results can certainly be expected. Even the testing process is open to discussion as to its validity. This back-and-forth between knowledgeable people is what keeps innovation moving. That's all I've seen here in this discussion. I haven't seen any "belligerent" prose (well, maybe the 'pigeon poo' was a little testy)! As you know I spent two days with you learning the process and paid my $100 to become a licensed Wapin installer. I'm interested in _anything_ that can improve our chosen instrument. That doesn't mean that I don't still have questions. Like most in our line of work I always want to know how and why something works. These are questions, not attacks! dave David M. Porritt dporritt at smu.edu -----Original Message----- From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Tim Coates Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2006 6:21 AM To: College and University Technicians Subject: Re: [CAUT] WAPIN Installation Jim, I responded to what I thought was appropriate for me to respond to. I saw nowhere that the questions about the testing shown on the website were directed to me. It appeared to me my post of November 5 prompted you to go to the website, but I didn't see the questions were directed to me. I did not do the testing. Michael Wathen did that particular testing you ask about on the website. He is the person who should respond. I have tried to get him involved in this conversation. But there are times he will not continue a conversation if the tone turns belligerent. Tim Coates You wrote: In his November 4 post, Tim Coates said that my post of the same date was interesting, but that I lacked history and information about the process. How is that so? Exactly what is it that I am lacking, Tim? Pursuant to Tim's post of November 5, I looked up the "Scientific Data" on the WAPIN web site. Six spectrum plots were shown, two each of a rebuilt 1929 Steinway D with WAPIN bridge, two of an original 1984 D without the WAPIN, and two of a Kawai concert grand. A linear and a logarithmic plot of the spectrum of note D3 of each piano was shown. I have some questions regarding those plots. On Nov 6, 2006, at 11:41 AM, James Ellis wrote: > In his November 4 post, Tim Coates said that my post of the same date > was > interesting, but that I lacked history and information about the > process. > How is that so? Exactly what is it that I am lacking, Tim?
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC