Soundboard stiffening (was Re: No downbearing)

[David Skolnik]

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
RicB-

More than the question of semantics in this present set of conversations is 
a carelessness in observing and respecting thread subject titles.  This 
time, I participated in the offense.  When this became "Soundboard 
stiffening"  I no longer expected to find answers to what is becoming 
narrowly referred to as my "coupling" questions.  I said this in a reply to 
Dale Erwin, however, I also replied to a post from Ron Nossman under the 
"stiffening" title which was actually still dealing with my coupling 
obsession.  I should have moved that discussion back to "No downbearing? 
REVISITED" . Since I owe Ron a response to his last (next to last) post, I 
will try to figure out how to title it clearly, if possible at this point.

Another serious problem, which makes this like a game of "telephone", is 
the tendency to distort intended meanings in the process of 
paraphrasing.  For example, in Dale Erwin's post which you responded to 
below, he presented his paraphrase of his understanding of my many 
questions, but he presented it as a quote from me, except 1) I never said 
it (as best as I can determine), and 2) as a paraphrase, its generality 
doesn't do justice to the range of very specific questions I have been 
asking.  In your previous post, you also complained of being 
misquoted.  But I feel you commit a similar error in that same post in your 
representation of my position.

(RicB Mon, 02 Feb 2004 09:18:10 +0100)
>So Davids question as to whether he could walk into a store.. measure 
>negative bearing at a spot and conclude without further ado that there is 
>a <<problem>> must be answered with a no.

This is a straw man, one which you set up only to be able to knock it 
down.  This does not do justice to the questions I have tried to raised.

>In the first place... its quite concievable that no << problem >> can be 
>associated with any particular instance of localized negative downbearing.

Or maybe your not hearing it, or maybe it hasn't manifest itself as an 
aural problem, yet.

>  Then, in the second place.. you immediatly open a monsterous can of 
> worms, as much of what can be considered a <<problem>> in this context, 
> is going to boil down to whether any particular type of sound is pleasing 
> or not... good or bad... acceptable or not.... a subjective sumphole to 
> suffocate in :)

I don't think this is fair.  When in doubt, make everything subjective or 
relative?

I'm starting to lose hope, or maybe I'm just hungry.

David Skolnik


At 09:26 AM 2/2/2004 +0100, you wrote:
>Erwinspiano@aol.com wrote:
>
>>     The amount of bearing does regulate the rate at which tonal energy 
>> leaves the board/system. Use a garden hose for an analogy turned on full 
>> blast then slowly pinch it to restrict water flow. This I belive is a 
>> simple definition of mechanical imedance.
>
>I think a better analogy would be that its what you place (and how close 
>you place it)  in front of the stream of water coming out of the hose that 
>determines how much water comes out.
>That the amount of downbearing can effect the net mechanical imedance the 
>panel presents does not equate to
>
>"downbearing is the determining factor"
>
>Simply because downbearing is only one of several factors that can contribute.
>
>>    David S's question which is ,"does bearing do anything other than 
>> make the board stiffer" I think can be answered by saying I think so 
>> based on what I said above. Its more reactive. Any thing under stress is 
>> more reactive.
>
>I think this statement says basically the same thing as I say above, and 
>what John said in earlier posts. Seems to me we are getting hung up in 
>sematics again.
>
>Cheers
>RicB
>
>_______________________________________________
>pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/98/ba/5b/4f/attachment.htm

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--