Lowell Gauge

[David Skolnik]

Phil & Bill -

It's doubtful that Lowell was able to retire on all the profits he made off 
the gauge.  The investment is surely sizable, and you know right off that 
the Journal illustrator isn't buying one.  You'd have to make it better and 
/ or cheaper, otherwise, why not buy the original?  I spoke with Tom 
yesterday, wanting to share the thoughts about the use of the tool that I 
and Ed Foote had mentioned here.  He explained that his personal life had 
been in significant turmoil over the last couple of years, preventing him 
from attending to this aspect of his professional life.  He is now planning 
to take steps to provide the tool again, which is good news to me, as I've 
broken mine more than once  (abuse, not poor workmanship).

Just sharing what I know,

David Skolnik RPT; DBH






At 12:02 PM 2/25/2004 -0800, Phil Ford wrote:
> >Finally, I'd like to say that I'm not happy with Tom Lowell's attention to
> >the market for his downbearing gage, which I believe is the best reader of
> >what's happened to downbearing and the bridge over the decades. In fact,
> >some enterprising supply house could look at his patent to see just how
> >secure it is. I gather that Baldwin's "prior art" is overwhelming in this
> >little device, and the only reason he was able to patent and market it was
> >because they chose to overlook his enterprise. I'd suggest that in light
> >of his neglect (when's the last time a supply house told you when the item
> >was going to be back "in stock"), someone else could easily step in,
> >hopefully with Baldwin's blessings.
> >
> >Bill Ballard RPT
> >NH Chapter, P.T.G.
>
>As a matter of interest, I went and looked for his patent.  I thought it
>might be old enough that it was no longer in force.  Not quite, but it
>won't be too long until that's true (2 more years).  For those that are
>interested, the patent for the gage is 4,798,005.  The patent contains
>images of the gage and shows it in use.
>
>I also found that Mr. Lowell had patented a method of simulating
>downbearing load on a soundboard.  Basically the setup is a plunger mounted
>on a frame over the piano.  The stated purpose is for more accurately and
>consistently setting downbearing.  Seems like a good idea but I'm amazed
>that a patent was granted for such a thing.  The number is 4,697,494.  That
>one expires this year.
>
>Phil Ford
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives