Exactly! David Ilvedson, RPT Pacifica, CA 94044 >Whatever! >dp >David M. Porritt, RPT >dporritt at smu.edu >-----Original Message----- >From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of >ricb at pianostemmer.no >Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 8:10 AM >To: caut at ptg.org >Subject: [CAUT] A clarification and a response to David Poritt >Hi David >First let me say thank your for your kind spirited response. >Honestly tho... I really fail to see how any of what I have written >in the past frew notes should have provoked anyone... let alone the >violent response from David Love. I felt, and still do that the >context of that which was written was dead on target within the >context of the discussion, the standpoints I cited that I assert >David Love takes arewell documented, and not one iota of my posts >were directed even slightly as criticisms of these standpoints. >Quite the opposite I underlined my disdain at the comment made to me >by the SF tech. I went on further to state that this kind of thing >simply goes to show how wide the field of acceptable piano voicing >indeed is. >The passion evoked here if anything simply underlines that this width >is far greater then many of our own individual perspectives includes. >I fail to see how anyone could possibly conclude otherwise when it >comes down to it. Nor do I see why this should be veiwed as a flame. >Let me clarify a point, since it seems neccessary after all. About >the SF tech which David Love took so illy. I also happen to know >three technicians in that same area, one of them a bit personally, >who have the greatest respect for Davids work... not the least his >voicing styles. I personally do not know David Love... and would >never draw any direct conclusions as to how much he does or doesnt >know... how good his work is... or any of the rest of it. I see no >reason to doubt his dedication to our trade or to do what he feels is >the absolute best for pianos. Someone may someday show me such >reason... but I rather doubt it. I do reserve the right to disagree >with his stated standpoints in any polite and topical way I see fit. >And, I must in turn afford that same respect to him and anyone else >for that matter. >I had thought it rather obvious that my comments were not pointed in >a personal direction, but rather in the same path of the discussion >as a whole. >David Loves position on voicing, duplex, soundboard design, and other >issues that ultimately describe a preference for piano sound and >performance are well documented. This is to be commended and >respected as far as that goes. >The only thing I ever raise my finger about is when one starts to >assume that ones own perspectives are somehow better then others, or >that when others perspectives do not fit ones own they are in some >way or another always managed to be discounted in a variety of ways. >Often enough... as seems evident by the present discourse... this >kind of thing happens without one even being aware of it. >I stand by my origional assertion that there seems to be a tendancy >amoung some techs to opt for a much quieter rounder voice at the >expence of what some others find to represent brilliance. I see no >reason why anyone should take offence at that statement, question the >its obvious validity, nor find reason for criticism one way or the >other. Indeed... part of the beauty of our trade is exactly the large >degree of variance in what piano sound can be. >As for the D++ .... If I am in error then I am indeed sorry. But I >remember rather clearly a comment or two in a not so distant past >post where you mentioned some bitterness that some pianists would not >give this instrument a fair chance because it was <<not a real >Steinway>> anymore... and I also remember offering you support on the >matter. I will look through the archives and see if I can find the >post. I do not believe I said in my last anything about you >personally finding any fault with the instrument. Quite the opposite, >it your continued enthusiasm for it and indeed my experience with the >Nossaman instrument in Rochester that makes me very wishfull that I >could find the time and resources to come and visit you, and have a >thorough look see. >All this said... I simply must insist on the right to voice my >considered opinions without being accused of not knowing what I am >talking about... or of attacking people, or of any of the rest of it. >I hold people to their word and documented standpoints... pass really >no value judgement on them beyond the <<being acceptant of others>> >bit. >At least this is in my mind, and this is what I strive to accomplish >to the very best of my abilities. >Best >Richard Brekne >Ric: >When you send out these flames it would help if you gave full names to >the targets. You stated below "Secondly... it was not just a couple >three months back David did indeed >air frustration......" There are several Davids on this list so some >indication of which one you meant would be helpful. I know I have not >complained about the D+ so you must be referring to some other David >about some other problem with some other piano. >Better yet, try a little harder not to send out these unnecessary >flames. >dp >David M. Porritt, RPT >dporritt at smu.edu
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC