>...Against what seems should be so... the strings will indeed <<climb>> >the pins one way or the other and the side bearing math model is quite >obviously in error or not a complete enough model to describe the >condition adequatly. My apologies for not choosing my words more carefully. I should have said that this particular model shows no mechanism for the strings to climb the pin. The point of the model was to offer one possible explanation for why the strings might not move down the pin if they were above the bridge cap, regardless of how they got there. A model is just that, a model, not the real thing. It is limited by the parameters modeled and the assumptions made. To the extent that it is a good or useful model it will illuminate something about the real thing, provide a basis for discussion, or yield ideas for further investigation. At least it looks like it wasn't a failure at providing a basis for discussion. > And, if you do actually take the time to see how long each string > seating job stays seated... you will find that most often they stay down > quite long. Why would that be if the strings want to climb the pins? >"There is a diety hiding in just about every dark corner of what is >commonly refered to as knowledge" Alfred Lodge >RicB What's a diety? Phil Ford
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC